Skip to content
Back to skills

Ml Experiment Standards

ASecurity

Always invoke for training, validating, tuning, benchmarking, or claiming readiness of a predictive model. Covers leakage audits, spatial and grouped splits, metrics, reproducibility, and honest reporting. Invoke especially when spatial dependence, split design, or deployment geography is unknown; uncertainty is a reason to use this skill. Do not trigger for descriptive EDA or non-predictive statistical inference.

  • 10 stars
  • 0 votes
  • 0 copies
  • 3 views
  • Added September 4, 2026
ai-agentspythongoapi

Works with

  • api

Security analysis

A100/100

Pro scans all 4 files and shows the line behind each finding

Scanned September 4, 2026

npx -y skills add muend/geoai-skills --skill ml-experiment-standards --agent claude-code

Installs into .claude/skills of the current project.

Are you the author of Ml Experiment Standards?

Add the live security badge to your README. It updates with every re-scan.

Security grade badge for Ml Experiment Standards
[![Security: A — Skills Directory](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/api/skills/muend-ml-experiment-standards/badge)](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/muend-ml-experiment-standards)

More formats (shields.io, HTML) on the badges page. Keep it an A: scan every change in CI with Pro.

Download with Pro
SKILL.md
---
name: ml-experiment-standards
description: >-
  Always invoke for training, validating, tuning, benchmarking, or claiming
  readiness of a predictive model. Covers leakage audits, spatial and grouped
  splits, metrics, reproducibility, and honest reporting. Invoke especially
  when spatial dependence, split design, or deployment geography is unknown;
  uncertainty is a reason to use this skill. Do not trigger for descriptive
  EDA or non-predictive statistical inference.
license: MIT
metadata:
  author: Muhammed Enes Duran
---

# ML Experiment Standards

Purpose: every ML job (quick prototypes included) is reproducible,
leakage-free, and metric-justified. These are not optional polish; every
skipped item typically returns as "the model collapsed in production" or
"the result didn't replicate".

## 1. EDA comes first

Before any model, produce and show: distributions, missingness rates,
outliers, target balance, salient correlations. Metric and loss choice
depend on this information; a model recommendation without EDA is a guess.

## 2. Leakage audit

At every split decision, answer explicitly (and write the answer as a code
comment): "Does the training set contain indirect information about any
test sample?"

| Data type | Correct split | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Independent samples | Stratified k-fold | Preserves class ratios |
| Time series | TimeSeriesSplit / walk-forward | Future must not leak into past |
| **Spatial data** | Spatial block CV — see `references/spatial-cv-protocol.md` | Neighbors are near-duplicates |
| Grouped data (patient, parcel, scene) | GroupKFold | A group must not straddle the split |

- Scalers/encoders/imputers are **fit on train only**; the clean path is
  `sklearn.pipeline.Pipeline` — CV then fits correctly by construction.
- Target-derived features (target encoding etc.) must be computed
  out-of-fold, and shown to be.

The spatial protocol in `references/spatial-cv-protocol.md` is the single
canonical source for this repo — other skills link here; do not restate it.

## 3. Metric selection — justified

Never choose a metric by default; write a one-sentence rationale:

- Imbalanced classes → **F1 / AUC-PR**, not accuracy (accuracy rewards
  majority-class memorization).
- Segmentation → **IoU/Dice** (pixel accuracy is inflated by background).
- Regression → RMSE (sensitive to large errors) vs MAE (robust) vs R²
  (variance explained) — justify from the use case.
- Every point estimate gets uncertainty: bootstrap CI or mean ± std across
  CV folds. A single number hides whether a difference is signal or noise.

## 4. Reproducibility skeleton

Every training script follows this shape (script-first; no notebook magic):

```python
"""Experiment: <name>. Goal and success criterion: <one sentence>."""
from dataclasses import dataclass, asdict
import json, random
import numpy as np

@dataclass
class Config:
    seed: int = 42
    lr: float = 1e-3
    batch_size: int = 32
    epochs: int = 100
    patience: int = 10  # early stopping

def set_seed(seed: int) -> None:
    random.seed(seed)
    np.random.seed(seed)
    # if torch: torch.manual_seed(seed); torch.cuda.manual_seed_all(seed)

def main(cfg: Config) -> None:
    set_seed(cfg.seed)
    ...  # data -> split -> pipeline -> train -> evaluate
    with open("runs/run_meta.json", "w", encoding="utf-8") as f:
        json.dump({"config": asdict(cfg), "metrics": metrics}, f, indent=2)

if __name__ == "__main__":
    main(Config())
```

- Config lives in a dataclass/YAML, never hardcoded — sweeps and run
  comparison depend on it.
- Pin library versions (`pip freeze > requirements.txt`).
- Use MLflow/W&B when available; the JSON log above is the minimum.

## 5. Deep learning extras

- **Loss rationale**: Dice/Dice+CE for imbalanced segmentation; write why.
  Focal only after comparison — not a free win.
- **Augmentation rationale**: state which transforms respect the physics
  of the problem (orientation-dependent tasks forbid some rotations;
  multispectral forbids naive color jitter).
- **Overfitting control**: early stopping with patience + a train/val
  curve in the report; no curve, no "the model is good".
- **Capacity order**: small model + simple baseline first (logistic
  regression, RF); a deep model that can't beat the baseline is a data
  problem, not an architecture problem.
- EO-specific chipping/inference details → `geo-deep-learning`.

## 6. System context (MLOps)

Position every model in its chain in one paragraph: data source →
cleaning → features/versioning → training → evaluation → deployment
(batch/real-time) → monitoring (data/model drift). Even for a prototype,
note "what this step becomes in production".

## 7. Report format

```
## Experiment: <name>
- Data: n=<>, split: <strategy + rationale>
- Baseline: <model> → <metric ± CI>
- Model: <model> → <metric ± CI>
- Leakage audit: <what was checked>
- Next step: <single recommendation>
```

When reporting differences, respect statistical honesty: if the gap
doesn't exceed the across-fold std, say "no clear difference" — no
p-hacking, no selective reporting.

## Execution contract

- **Workflow:** define prediction target and decision use; establish a baseline; audit leakage; create spatially valid splits; train reproducibly; quantify uncertainty; inspect errors and deployment fit.
- **Decision rules:** apply this skill only to predictive model experiments; use spatial statistics for inference, geostatistics for sampled-surface estimation, and descriptive analysis without forcing a model.
- **Verification protocol:** reproduce from a clean environment, compare against baseline across folds or seeds, inspect spatial residuals, verify split independence, and test the final decision threshold.
- **Failure modes:** invalidate uplift claims for leakage, post-split preprocessing, inappropriate metrics, non-independent test units, selective runs, or train-serving skew.
- **Deliverables:** experiment configuration, split and seed manifest, baseline and model metrics with uncertainty, leakage audit, error analysis, artifacts, and deployment caveats.
- **Source freshness:** consult [the authoritative source registry](references/authoritative-sources.md) before using version-sensitive split, metric, or reproducibility APIs.

Files in this skill

  • SKILL.md6.2 KB
  • agents/openai.yaml232 B
  • references/authoritative-sources.md767 B
  • references/spatial-cv-protocol.md3.2 KB

Attribution

Is this your skill, or is something wrong with this listing? Request removal or report an issue. Author removals are honored within 72 hours.

Comments

Loading comments…

Newsletter

Get the weekly list of safe new skills, and the ones we pulled.