litiao1224

Data Analysis Litiao

資料分析v1.0.0
作者:litiao1224更新於 2026-05-11data-analysis-litiao@clawhub_litiao1224/data-analysis-litiao
報表生成資料洞察指標監控#Data Analysis

據 AlphaMoat 統計,截至 2026-09,Data Analysis Litiao 累計下載 3,718 次、獲 1 個星標,在全部 5,078 個 AI 技能中排名第 2,876 位,在「資料分析」分類(399 個)中排名第 217 位。

累計安裝
105
累計下載
3718
星標
1
全站排名
#2,876
全站前 57% · 「資料分析」前 55%
平台累計安裝累計下載星標評論
ClawHub ↗1053278--
SkillHub ↗10437181—

各平台的計數口徑不同,統計時間不一致。

這個技能是做什麼的

主文強調檢查樣本量、比較組、公平性、多重比較、效應大小、資料質量和混雜因素,並量化不確定性、說明限制。方法選擇與結論仍需根據實際資料和假設核驗。

資料釋出於 2026-10-29

可以用來做什麼

  • 梳理分析要支援的決策及可用資料。
  • 選擇適合研究問題的統計分析方法。
  • 檢查偏差、混雜因素和不確定性。

什麼時候用

  • 需要規劃資料分析或檢驗一個明確假設時。
  • 需要比較群體、分析時間趨勢或發現異常時。
  • 樣本量、資料質量或比較條件可能影響結論時。

示例提示詞

以下是根據技能文件生成的示例,不代表實際執行結果。

先明確一個業務決策,再為它設計相應的資料分析方案。
檢查分析結論中可能存在的偏差、混雜因素和不確定性。

月度資料趨勢

累計下載3718
1193254939052026-03 · 累計下載 13802026-05 · 累計下載 25982026-06 · 累計下載 27672026-07 · 累計下載 30572026-08 · 累計下載 31302026-09 · 累計下載 371826-0326-09
星標1
0112026-03 · 星標 -2026-05 · 星標 -2026-06 · 星標 -2026-07 · 星標 12026-08 · 星標 -2026-09 · 星標 126-0326-09

2026-09 起統計方法調整:同名技能按作者分別統計,並覆蓋全部技能。圖中虛線為調整前的月份,與之後的資料不直接比較,也不計算跨越調整的增長。 該技能有同名的其他版本,調整前的資料歸屬當前下載量最大的這一個。

月份累計下載環比星標
2026-093718—1
2026-083130+2.4%-
2026-073057+10.5%1
2026-062767+6.5%-
2026-052598—-
2026-031380—-

SKILL.md 原文

以下是作者釋出的原始檔案,按純文字顯示,本站未做修改或稽核;其中的連結不可點選,命令請核實後再執行。抓取於 2026-10-23。

2.9 KB · ClawHub v1.0.0
---
name: data-analysis-litiao
description: Turn raw data into decisions with statistical rigor, proper methodology, and awareness of analytical pitfalls.
---

## When to Load

User asks about: analyzing data, finding patterns, understanding metrics, testing hypotheses, cohort analysis, A/B testing, churn analysis, statistical significance.

## Core Principle
展開全部(共 68 行)

Analysis without a decision is just arithmetic. Always clarify: **What would change if this analysis shows X vs Y?**

## Methodology First

Before touching data:
1. **What decision** is this analysis supporting?
2. **What would change your mind?** (the real question)
3. **What data do you actually have** vs what you wish you had?
4. **What timeframe** is relevant?

## Statistical Rigor Checklist

- [ ] Sample size sufficient? (small N = wide confidence intervals)
- [ ] Comparison groups fair? (same time period, similar conditions)
- [ ] Multiple comparisons? (20 tests = 1 "significant" by chance)
- [ ] Effect size meaningful? (statistically significant ≠ practically important)
- [ ] Uncertainty quantified? ("12-18% lift" not just "15% lift")

## Analytical Pitfalls to Catch

| Pitfall | What it looks like | How to avoid |
|---------|-------------------|--------------|
| Simpson's Paradox | Trend reverses when you segment | Always check by key dimensions |
| Survivorship bias | Only analyzing current users | Include churned/failed in dataset |
| Comparing unequal periods | Feb (28d) vs March (31d) | Normalize to per-day or same-length windows |
| p-hacking | Testing until something is "significant" | Pre-register hypotheses or adjust for multiple comparisons |
| Correlation in time series | Both went up = "related" | Check if controlling for time removes relationship |
| Aggregating percentages | Averaging percentages directly | Re-calculate from underlying totals |

For detailed examples of each pitfall, see `pitfalls.md`.

## Approach Selection

| Question type | Approach | Key output |
|---------------|----------|------------|
| "Is X different from Y?" | Hypothesis test | p-value + effect size + CI |
| "What predicts Z?" | Regression/correlation | Coefficients + R² + residual check |
| "How do users behave over time?" | Cohort analysis | Retention curves by cohort |
| "Are these groups different?" | Segmentation | Profiles + statistical comparison |
| "What's unusual?" | Anomaly detection | Flagged points + context |

For technique details and when to use each, see `techniques.md`.

## Output Standards

1. **Lead with the insight**, not the methodology
2. **Quantify uncertainty** — ranges, not point estimates
3. **State limitations** — what this analysis can't tell you
4. **Recommend next steps** — what would strengthen the conclusion

## Red Flags to Escalate

- User wants to "prove" a predetermined conclusion
- Sample size too small for reliable inference
- Data quality issues that invalidate analysis
- Confounders that can't be controlled for

「資料分析」分類下的熱門技能

資料月份:2026-09 · 下載/星標/安裝數聚合自公開技能註冊庫(ClawHub、SkillHub),按月更新。口徑說明見資料方法。