「fair」の検索結果

Meta Ads (Facebook + Instagram) account audit and business context setup. Use for account-health audits and business-context setup. Trigger on "audit my Meta ads", "audit my Facebook ads", "Meta ads audit", "set up my Meta ads", "onboard Meta", "Meta account overview", "how's my Meta account", "Meta health check", "what should I fix in my Facebook ads", or when the user is new to NotFair Meta and hasn't run an audit before.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Connect NotFair paid-ad accounts and establish reusable campaign context. Use when setting up paid media in a new workspace, connecting Google, Meta, X, LinkedIn, Reddit, or TikTok Ads, refreshing brand context, or preparing an agent to work on ads safely.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Coordinate safe, evidence-based paid-media work across Google Ads, Meta Ads, X Ads, LinkedIn Ads, Reddit Ads, TikTok Ads, Amazon, and ChatGPT Ads. Use for broad ads questions, multi-channel strategy, budgets, CPA or ROAS, campaign requests, spend, ad performance, or when routing to the right NotFair paid-ads skill.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Connect a CMS to notfair SEO tools. Guides users through configuring WordPress, Strapi, Contentful, or Ghost — tests the connection, and writes credentials to .env.local. Once set up, seo-analysis automatically cross- references CMS content against Google Search Console data. Use whenever the user says "connect my CMS", "set up WordPress", "configure Strapi", "add Contentful", "connect Ghost", or "CMS setup". Also trigger if the user asks why no CMS data appears in a seo-analysis report.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Google Ads account audit and business context setup. Use for account-health audits and business-context setup. Trigger on "audit my ads", "ads audit", "set up my ads", "onboard", "account overview", "how's my account", "ads health check", "what should I fix in my ads", or when the user is new to NotFair and hasn't run an audit before.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Query and operate connected Google Search Console properties through NotFair MCP. Use for live GSC query or page performance, clicks, impressions, CTR, position, traffic changes, indexing status, URL inspection, sitemap reads or approved sitemap submission/removal, and Search Console MCP setup. Route full-site SEO audits to seo-analysis.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Audit, diagnose, and safely operate connected TikTok Ads accounts through the NotFair MCP. Use for TikTok advertising, Spark Ads, short-form video ads, campaign or ad-group analysis, spend, conversions, targeting, creative, budgets, bids, creator briefs, campaign setup, or approved TikTok Ads changes.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Audit, diagnose, plan, and safely operate connected LinkedIn Ads accounts through the NotFair MCP, with an export-based fallback. Use for LinkedIn advertising, sponsored content, lead-generation forms, job-title or company targeting, campaign groups, creatives, conversions, lead quality, budgets, bids, or approved LinkedIn campaign changes.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Operate connected GoHighLevel CRM accounts through the NotFair MCP. Use for GoHighLevel, HighLevel, GHL contacts, conversations, opportunities, calendars, pipelines, tags, tasks, forms, invoices, products, or approved CRM changes.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

FAIR-aligned exposure quantification: turns a pile of recon findings into a defensible 0-100 + A-F org risk score (Likelihood x Impact, three ownership-aware factors: exposure/threat/impact), an ownership + proof demotion cap so unproven or weakly-owned findings can't inflate the number, a $-denominated FAIR loss-magnitude estimate (IBM/Ponemon per-record cost bands, cross-source record dedup, threat-factor annualization), attack-path amplification (curated red-team chain catalog + generic graph-walk engine, with a kill-chain vs shared-fate honesty gate), and a board-ready one-pager deliverable (hero $ + letter grade + top-3 findings + top attack path + the ask). Extends osint-methodology's severity rubric and client deliverable templates with quantification. Passive analysis only -- operates on findings already collected, no target traffic, no API keys. Use when asked to score risk, quantify exposure, estimate breach cost, build a board report, translate technical findings to dollars, or explain why a grade or dollar figure came out the way it did.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Decode an auto repair estimate — what each line actually is, which items are urgent vs upsell, and the questions that separate a fair shop from a fishing expedition. Use when someone asks 'is this repair quote fair', 'decode my mechanic's estimate', 'do I really need all this', or 'is the shop ripping me off'. Produces a line-by-line decode with urgency triage, parts/labor sanity checks, ranked red flags, and the exact questions to ask the shop before authorizing.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Apply the NIST AI Risk Management Framework (AI RMF 1.0) and adjacent guidance to AI / ML systems — model lifecycle governance, fairness and bias evaluation, robustness, transparency, accountability, third-party model risk, monitoring for drift, and AI incident response. Broader than prompt-injection (which is the security slice). Use when the user mentions 'AI risk,' 'AI governance,' 'NIST AI RMF,' 'AI compliance,' 'ML governance,' 'model risk management,' 'AI fairness,' 'AI bias,' 'algorithmic accountability,' 'AI Bill of Rights,' 'EU AI Act,' 'AI transparency,' 'model card,' 'AI red team,' 'AI safety,' 'responsible AI,' 'model drift,' 'concept drift,' 'AI monitoring,' 'AI incident,' or needs to assess or govern an AI / ML system.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Use when the user wants to analyze dataset bias, create stratified samples, evaluate fairness, or plan dataset collection. Triggers on phrases like "dataset bias", "stratified sample", "class imbalance", "data distribution", "fairness analysis", or "ethical review".

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Use IBM AI Fairness 360 for tabular fairness datasets, metrics, bias mitigation algorithms, sklearn-compatible workflows, subgroup detectors, and explainers.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Audit whether a paper's baseline comparisons are COMPLETE, FAIR, and SIGNIFICANT: a required recent SOTA baseline is missing while 'best/SOTA' is claimed (HP-MISSING-BASELINE); a baseline is undertuned / given less compute-tuning-data, run at a mismatched config, or the equal-budget ablation-as-baseline is absent (HP-WEAK-BASELINE); 'outperforms' is asserted over overlapping error bars or with no variance/seeds (HP-SIG-OVERLAP); and a cross-row 'improves over baseline by X%' is arithmetically wrong (HP-DELTA-ERROR, cross-row form only). A versioned per-domain baseline profile + a live leaderboard/recency search are assembled by the EXECUTOR as structured facts; a fresh cross-model reviewer (gpt-5.6-sol xhigh, read-only, fresh thread per dimension) PROPOSES findings, each span-anchored to a ledger claim_id; tools/adjudicate_findings.py DECIDES the verdict. Works at L0 (stated comparisons) and deepens at L2 (configs/result files). A completeness question it cannot settle internally becomes needs_external_check, never a guessed missing baseline. Emits baseline-comparison-audit.findings.json; computes NO verdict. Detect-only. Triggers: "baseline audit", "missing baselines", "is the comparison fair", "weak baseline", "baseline 误报", "SOTA earned?".

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

投行并购 (投行并购 / 交易撮合 (Investment Banking M&A / Dealmaking) — 面向并购顾问、企业融资、卖方/买方交易执行的职业认知操作系统，从业者(分析师 Analyst / 经理 Associate / 副总裁 VP / 董事 Director / 董事总经理 MD / 内部公司发展 Corp Dev / PE 投资人)、想入行者、以及服务这行(法律/会计/估值/咨询)的视角。覆盖: (a) 第一性张力 — 投行 M&A 的核心世界观分歧: **价格 vs 价值 (price 是市场愿意付的, value 是内在的, deal 在两者缝隙里成交) ⇄ 确定性 vs 最高价 (certainty of close 对卖方常胜过纸面最高报价) ⇄ 顾问/中介 vs 委托代理 (banker 是 agent, 客户利益 vs 成交费的激励冲突真实存在, 「banker 总想成交」是行业原罪批判)**; 更深层 — 「过程/竞价纪律 (controlled auction 制造竞争张力、信息不对称管理) ⇄ 关系/信任 (relationship banking、长期 coverage、reputational capital)」, 「叙事/包装 (the story, equity story, positioning) ⇄ 数字/尽调 (the numbers, diligence, quality of earnings)」, 「估值的科学外衣 (DCF/comps 的伪精确) ⇄ 谈判的真实定价 (价格由 leverage、竞争、时机决定)」; (b) 估值与分析正典 (最标准化、最易蒸出高质量+CLI 化) — DCF (折现现金流: FCF 预测/WACC 折现率/terminal value 终值/Gordon growth vs exit multiple), Comparable Companies (可比公司/trading comps: EV/EBITDA, EV/Revenue, P/E), Precedent Transactions (先例交易/deal comps: control premium 控制权溢价), LBO (杠杆收购模型: IRR/MOIC/debt schedule/sources & uses), Accretion/Dilution (增厚/摊薄分析: EPS 影响、pro forma), Sum-of-the-Parts (分部估值/SOTP), Football Field (估值区间图), Merger Model (合并模型: synergies 协同/purchase accounting/goodwill), Sensitivity/scenario; (c) 交易流程与产出物 — 卖方流程 (sell-side: teaser 简介 → NDA → CIM/IM 信息备忘录 → management presentation → IOI 意向函 → data room 数据室 → LOI/term sheet → confirmatory diligence → SPA 买卖协议 → signing → closing), 买方流程 (buy-side: thesis/sourcing → outreach → valuation → bid → exclusivity → diligence → financing → close), auction 类型 (broad/targeted/negotiated/preemptive bid); 产出物: pitchbook 推介材料、CIM、fairness opinion 公平意见、board presentation、fee letter、engagement letter; (d) 交易结构与条款 — consideration (cash/stock/mix/earnout 对赌)、deal protections (breakup fee 分手费/go-shop/no-shop/MAC 重大不利变化条款)、representations & warranties 陈述与保证、escrow 托管、working capital adjustment 营运资金调整、reverse termination fee、collar 价格区间、tender offer vs merger、hostile vs friendly、defensive tactics (poison pill 毒丸/white knight 白衣骑士/staggered board); (e) 行业结构与角色 — bulge bracket (高盛/摩根士丹利/JPM/BofA/花旗) vs elite boutique (Centerview/Evercore/Moelis/Lazard/PJT/Perella) vs middle market (Houlihan Lokey/William Blair/Harris Williams) vs regional/independent; analyst→associate→VP→director→MD 晋升金字塔; coverage (行业组) vs product (M&A/ECM/DCM/leveraged finance/restructuring); sponsors group (服务 PE); 买方包括 PE/strategic acquirer/corp dev; (f) 量化指标与节奏 — deal fee (success fee 业内通常约 1-2% 视规模递减/retainer/Lehman formula)、league table 排行榜、pitch→mandate 转化、deal velocity、hours culture (analyst 80-100h/week 文化批判)、bonus/comp 结构、deal sheet (简历上的成交清单); (g) 争议/批判 — fairness opinion 是否橡皮图章 (利益冲突: 出意见的 banker 也收成交费)、estimate 的伪精确 (DCF garbage in garbage out、假设驱动结论)、banker 永远建议成交 (deal 偏见、empire building 助推 CEO 自利并购)、协同效应系统性高估 (大量并购毁灭价值、winner's curse 赢家诅咒)、analyst 血汗工厂文化 (2021 高盛 13 人 deck 事件、过劳死争议)、advisory 价值 vs 中介寻租之争、bulge vs boutique 的利益独立性叙事 (boutique 标榜「无承销利益冲突」)、SPAC 泡沫与 de-SPAC 教训; (h) 流派/思想谱系 — 估值学派 (Aswath Damodaran 估值教父/纽大、Tim Koller McKinsey《Valuation》、McKinsey valuation 体系) vs 公司金融教科书派 (Rosenbaum & Pearl《Investment Banking》行业圣经、Brealey Myers Allen、CFI/WSP/BIWS 培训体系) vs 交易实战派 (Bruce Wasserstein《Big Deal》、Joseph Perella/Felix Rohatyn 老派 dealmaker、现代 boutique 创始人) vs 行为/批判派 (并购毁灭价值的学术证据、Damodaran 对协同/控制权溢价的批判、Matt Levine《Money Stuff》解构华尔街逻辑) vs PE/buy-side 视角 (LBO 数学、value creation 杠杆/运营/multiple expansion)。不含: 二级市场股票交易/卖方研究 (equity research)、零售财富管理/private banking、纯 ECM/IPO 承销执行 (虽相关但聚焦 M&A advisory)、纯 PE 投后运营、量化交易/对冲基金策略、纯公司财务报表会计。) Master OS — automated mastery of 投行并购 / 交易撮合 (Investment Banking M&A / Dealmaking) — 面向并购顾问、企业融资、卖方/买方交易执行的职业认知操作系统，从业者(分析师 Analyst / 经理 Associate / 副总裁 VP / 董事 Director / 董事总经理 MD / 内部公司发展 Corp Dev / PE 投资人)、想入行者、以及服务这行(法律/会计/估值/咨询)的视角。覆盖: (a) 第一性张力 — 投行 M&A 的核心世界观分歧: **价格 vs 价值 (price 是市场愿意付的, value 是内在的, deal 在两者缝隙里成交) ⇄ 确定性 vs 最高价 (certainty of close 对卖方常胜过纸面最高报价) ⇄ 顾问/中介 vs 委托代理 (banker 是 agent, 客户利益 vs 成交费的激励冲突真实存在, 「banker 总想成交」是行业原罪批判)**; 更深层 — 「过程/竞价纪律 (controlled auction 制造竞争张力、信息不对称管理) ⇄ 关系/信任 (rela

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Quantify cyber risk using FAIR methodology with Monte Carlo simulation, assess control effectiveness against NIST CSF/CIS/ISO 27001 frameworks, evaluate risk appetite alignment, and analyze cyber insurance coverage adequacy. Covers threat landscape mapping, asset valuation, loss event frequency and magnitude estimation, annualized loss expectancy calculation, control gap analysis with ROI ranking, residual risk assessment, and insurance policy gap modeling at 90th/95th/99th percentile loss scenarios. Use when building risk registers, preparing board-level risk dashboards, evaluating security investment priorities, assessing cyber insurance coverage, or auditing any organization's risk quantification maturity per NIST RMF, ISO 27005, or FAIR standards.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Cyber Risk Quantification engineer for CyberRadar. Implements FAIR (Factor Analysis of Information Risk) methodology, Monte Carlo simulation for loss distribution modeling, financial impact quantification in multi-currency (SAR, USD, EUR, GBP), loss exceedance curves, risk treatment ROI calculation, insurance premium optimization, and board-ready financial risk reporting. Transforms qualitative risk assessments into monetary terms for executive decision-making. Triggers on: CRQ, FAIR, Monte Carlo, financial impact, loss modeling, risk quantification, cyber insurance, risk treatment ROI, financial risk.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Scaffolds or audits a social-science replication package and evaluates the manuscript and archived research objects against FAIR principles. Scaffold mode writes the folder structure, README, master.R, figure-table crosswalk, codebook, LICENSE placeholder, and .gitignore; audit mode grades the package against a pre-release checklist and audits data, code, materials, identifiers, licenses, access restrictions, and availability statements. Use when setting up or repairing a package, checking one before submission, auditing FAIR compliance, or drafting availability statements. Adapted from Yusaku Horiuchi’s replication-package-guide.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Simulate rigorous, fair peer review on a paper — in two modes. (A) Red-team YOUR OWN draft before submission to predict the reviews you'll get and get a fix list. (B) Review SOMEONE ELSE'S paper when you're an assigned reviewer or helping your advisor — produce a fair, venue-formatted, submission-ready review. Use whenever the user gives a paper (PDF, .tex, .md, arXiv link, or pasted text) and wants to predict reviews, find weaknesses before reviewers do, stress-test a submission, OR write a real review of another paper. Grounded in official NeurIPS/ICLR/ACL reviewer guidelines; every criticism pinned to a location, and checked against ACL's H1–H17 list of illegitimate critiques. 两种模式:审自己的稿(投稿前红队)/ 审别人的稿(当审稿人或帮导师),按会议官方标准评,绝不脑补、绝不发不正当批评。

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Evaluates management buyouts and take-private proposals with fairness assessment, minority squeeze-out mechanics, and appraisal rights analysis. Use when analyzing going-private deals, evaluating MBO fairness, or assessing minority shareholder protections.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Use when you need to answer "which attacker techniques do our controls actually stop, and how well?", "what controls should I have for this threat?", or "what telemetry should I collect to detect it?" — joining a customer's or your own security control baseline to ATT&CK techniques using a public, versioned evidence base of 9,545 control-to-technique mappings from six sources. Produces four ranked lists (addressed strongly, addressed weakly, real gaps, and techniques no control anywhere addresses). Use for control gap analysis, security programme prioritisation, board reporting on coverage, or the Resistance Strength side of a FAIR risk assessment. Invoke after /threat-actor-profiling or /lookup-liberty91 has produced a technique list.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Use for ethical thinking, or when a plan could harm or unfairly burden people: "should we do this?", "is this fair?", "privacy or bias risk", "who gets hurt?". Maps stakeholders, harms, power and consent. Skip for legal advice, neutral fact lookups and implementation-only work.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Expert en éthique de l'IA (bias detection, fairness, explainability, responsible AI, guardrails)

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。