Install any skill in seconds. Free to start, no credit card required.
Get Started Free →Generate testable hypotheses. Formulate from observations, design experiments, explore competing explanations, develop predictions, propose mechanisms, for scientific inquiry across domains.
.claude/skills/hypothesis-generation/SKILL.md| Test case | Without → With | Effect | Δ tokens | Δ turns |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| case-07 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | — | — |
| case-09 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | — | — |
| case-16 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | — | — |
| case-11 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | — | — |
| case-05 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | — | — |
Hypothesis generation is a systematic process for developing testable explanations. Formulate evidence-based hypotheses from observations, design experiments, explore competing explanations, and develop predictions. Apply this skill for scientific inquiry across domains.
This skill should be used when:
⚠️ MANDATORY: Every hypothesis generation report MUST include at least 1-2 AI-generated figures using the scientific-schematics skill.
This is not optional. Hypothesis reports without visual elements are incomplete. Before finalizing any document:
How to generate figures:
How to generate schematics:
bashpython scripts/generate_schematic.py "your diagram description" -o figures/output.png
The AI will automatically:
When to add schematics:
For detailed guidance on creating schematics, refer to the scientific-schematics skill documentation.
Follow this systematic process to generate robust scientific hypotheses:
Start by clarifying the observation, question, or phenomenon that requires explanation:
Search existing scientific literature to ground hypotheses in current evidence. Use both PubMed (for biomedical topics) and general web search (for broader scientific domains):
For biomedical topics:
For all scientific domains:
Search strategy:
references/literature_search_strategies.md for detailed search techniquesAnalyze and integrate findings from literature search:
Develop 3-5 distinct hypotheses that could explain the phenomenon. Each hypothesis should:
Strategies for generating hypotheses:
Assess each hypothesis against established quality criteria from references/hypothesis_quality_criteria.md:
Testability: Can the hypothesis be empirically tested? Falsifiability: What observations would disprove it? Parsimony: Is it the simplest explanation that fits the evidence? Explanatory Power: How much of the phenomenon does it explain? Scope: What range of observations does it cover? Consistency: Does it align with established principles? Novelty: Does it offer new insights beyond existing explanations?
Explicitly note the strengths and weaknesses of each hypothesis.
For each viable hypothesis, propose specific experiments or studies to test it. Consult references/experimental_design_patterns.md for common approaches:
Experimental design elements:
Consider multiple approaches:
For each hypothesis, generate specific, quantitative predictions:
Generate a professional LaTeX document using the template in assets/hypothesis_report_template.tex. The report should be well-formatted with colored boxes for visual organization and divided into a concise main text with comprehensive appendices.
Document Structure:
Main Text (Maximum 4 pages):
\newpage before each hypothesis box to prevent content overflowKeep main text highly concise - only the most essential information. All details go to appendices.
Page Break Strategy:
\newpage before hypothesis boxes to ensure they start on fresh pagesAppendices (Comprehensive, Detailed):
Colored Box Usage:
Use the custom box environments from hypothesis_generation.sty:
hypothesisbox1 through hypothesisbox5 - For each competing hypothesis (blue, green, purple, teal, orange)predictionbox - For testable predictions (amber)comparisonbox - For critical comparisons (steel gray)evidencebox - For supporting evidence highlights (light blue)summarybox - For executive summary (blue)Each hypothesis box should contain (keep concise for 4-page limit):
All detailed explanations, additional evidence, and comprehensive discussions belong in the appendices.
Critical Overflow Prevention:
\newpage before each hypothesis box to start it on a fresh pageCitation Requirements:
Aim for extensive citation to support all claims:
Main text citations should be selective - cite only the most critical papers. All comprehensive citation and detailed literature discussion belongs in the appendices. Use \citep{author2023} for parenthetical citations.
LaTeX Compilation:
The template requires XeLaTeX or LuaLaTeX for proper rendering:
bashxelatex hypothesis_report.tex bibtex hypothesis_report xelatex hypothesis_report.tex xelatex hypothesis_report.tex
Required packages: The hypothesis_generation.sty style package must be in the same directory or LaTeX path. It requires: tcolorbox, xcolor, fontspec, fancyhdr, titlesec, enumitem, booktabs, natbib.
Page Overflow Prevention:
To prevent content from overflowing on pages, follow these critical guidelines:
\newpage before boxes that contain substantial content:latex \newpage \begin{hypothesisbox1}[Hypothesis 1: Title] % Long content here \end{hypothesisbox1}
\newpage to start the box on a fresh page.\newpage between major sections to avoid overflow in detailed content areas.Quick Reference: See assets/FORMATTING_GUIDE.md for detailed examples of all box types, color schemes, and common formatting patterns.
Ensure all generated hypotheses meet these standards:
hypothesis_quality_criteria.md - Framework for evaluating hypothesis quality (testability, falsifiability, parsimony, explanatory power, scope, consistency)experimental_design_patterns.md - Common experimental approaches across domains (RCTs, observational studies, lab experiments, computational models)literature_search_strategies.md - Effective search techniques for PubMed and general scientific sourceshypothesis_generation.sty - LaTeX style package providing colored boxes, professional formatting, and custom environments for hypothesis reportshypothesis_report_template.tex - Complete LaTeX template with main text structure and comprehensive appendix sectionsFORMATTING_GUIDE.md - Quick reference guide with examples of all box types, color schemes, citation practices, and troubleshooting tips| Case | Status | Duration (ms) | Turns | Tokens | Tool calls | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Without | With | Δ | Without | With | Δ | Without | With | Δ | Without | With | Δ | ||
case-07 | fail→pass | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-09 | fail→pass | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-16 | fail→pass | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-18 | pass→pass | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-21 | fail→fail | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-11 | fail→pass | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-03 | fail→fail | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-05 | fail→pass | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-14 | pass→pass | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-04 | fail→pass | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-06 | fail→pass | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-01 | fail→fail | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-02 | fail→fail | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-13 | fail→pass | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-17 | fail→pass | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-19 | fail→fail | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-20 | fail→fail | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-15 | fail→pass | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-12 | fail→pass | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-10 | fail→pass | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-08 | fail→pass | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-22 | fail→fail | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
DecimalAI ran this skill against gemini-3.6-flash twice over the same eval suite — once with the skill loaded and once without — and compared the two runs case by case. 22 cases were attempted, and 19 counted toward the lift figure. The other 3 produced results that are not comparable between the two arms, so they are excluded from the headline rather than averaged into it. The headline lift of +59 percentage points is the difference between those two pass rates over the 19 comparable cases. 1 case got worse with the skill loaded, and it is included in that figure.
The per-case answers from this run were removed by the retention sweep, so the case table below shows the verdicts without the text either arm produced. The counts above were recorded at the time and are unaffected. Answers are now kept for 180 days.
Other measured skills in the registry, with their headline benchmark lift.