### Statistical Analysis
Works with
name: "statistical-analysis"
description: "Guided statistical analysis with test selection and reporting. Use when you need help choosing appropriate tests for your data, assumption checking, power analysis, and APA-formatted results. Best for..."
AI-first code editor with Composer
Before installing skills in Cursor, ensure your development environment meets these requirements:
node --versionstatistical-analysisExecute the skills CLI command in your project's root directory to begin installation:
Fetches statistical-analysis from K-Dense-AI/scientific-agent-skills and configures it for Cursor.
The CLI shows a list of agents. Use arrow keys and space to select Cursor:
Confirm successful installation by checking the skill directory location:
Restart Cursor to activate statistical-analysis. Access via /statistical-analysis in your agent's command palette.
We perform automated surface-level scans (Gen AI Scanner, Socket, Snyk) during installation. These checks detect common vulnerabilities but do not guarantee complete security. Always review skill source code and verify the publisher's reputation before production use.
Skills execute code in your environment. Always review source, verify the publisher, and test in isolation before production.
Submit your Claude Code skill and start earning
Automate repetitive workflows and reduce manual effort
Example
Generate reports, summarize documents, draft communications
Save 3-5 hours per week on routine tasks
Learn new skills, understand complex topics, get expert guidance
Example
Explain concepts, provide examples, suggest learning resources
Accelerate learning and skill development by 2x
Enhance output quality through reviews, suggestions, and refinements
Example
Review drafts, suggest improvements, catch errors
Improve work quality by 30-40% with less effort
1
total installs
1
this week
0
upvotes
Run in your terminal
1
installs
1
this week
—
stars
| name | statistical-analysis |
| description | Guided statistical analysis with test selection and reporting. Use when you need help choosing appropriate tests for your data, assumption checking, power analysis, and APA-formatted results. Best for academic research reporting, test selection guidance. For implementing specific models programmatically use statsmodels. |
| license | MIT license |
| metadata | version: "1.0" skill-author: K-Dense Inc. |
Statistical analysis is a systematic process for testing hypotheses and quantifying relationships. Conduct hypothesis tests (t-test, ANOVA, chi-square), regression, correlation, and Bayesian analyses with assumption checks and APA reporting. Apply this skill for academic research.
This skill should be used when:
Use uv to install the libraries used in this skill. Pin versions in production; unpinned installs are fine for exploration.
# Core frequentist stack (Python 3.10+; 3.12+ recommended for latest SciPy/ArviZ)
uv pip install "pingouin>=0.6" "scipy>=1.11" "statsmodels>=0.14.6" pandas matplotlib seaborn
# Bayesian modeling (PyMC 5 + ArviZ; ArviZ 0.23+ requires Python 3.12+)
uv pip install "pymc>=5.0" "arviz>=0.17"
Compatibility notes (2025–2026):
p_val, cohen_d, CI95, p_unc) — examples below use the current names.statsmodels>=0.14.6 with scipy>=1.11 to avoid _lazywhere import errors on SciPy 1.16+.For model-specific APIs (OLS, GLM, ARIMA), see the statsmodels skill. For PyMC workflows, see the pymc skill.
Use this decision tree to determine your analysis path:
START
│
├─ Need to SELECT a statistical test?
│ └─ YES → See "Test Selection Guide"
│ └─ NO → Continue
│
├─ Ready to check ASSUMPTIONS?
│ └─ YES → See "Assumption Checking"
│ └─ NO → Continue
│
├─ Ready to run ANALYSIS?
│ └─ YES → See "Running Statistical Tests"
│ └─ NO → Continue
│
└─ Need to REPORT results?
└─ YES → See "Reporting Results"
Use references/test_selection_guide.md for comprehensive guidance. Quick reference:
Comparing Two Groups:
Comparing 3+ Groups:
Relationships:
Bayesian Alternatives: All tests have Bayesian versions that provide:
references/bayesian_statistics.mdALWAYS check assumptions before interpreting test results.
Use the bundled scripts/assumption_checks.py module for automated checking. Run Python from the skill directory (skills/statistical-analysis/) or add scripts/ to sys.path:
from assumption_checks import comprehensive_assumption_check
# Comprehensive check with visualizations
results = comprehensive_assumption_check(
data=df,
value_col='score',
group_col='group', # Optional: for group comparisons
alpha=0.05
)
This performs:
For targeted checks, use individual functions:
from assumption_checks import (
check_normality,
check_normality_per_group,
check_homogeneity_of_variance,
check_linearity,
detect_outliers
)
# Example: Check normality with visualization
result = check_normality(
data=df['score'],
name='Test Score',
alpha=0.05,
plot=True
)
print(result['interpretation'])
print(result['recommendation'])
Normality violated:
Homogeneity of variance violated:
Linearity violated (regression):
See references/assumptions_and_diagnostics.md for comprehensive guidance.
Primary libraries for statistical analysis:
import pingouin as pg
import numpy as np
# Run independent t-test
result = pg.ttest(group_a, group_b, correction='auto')
# Extract results (Pingouin 0.5+ column names)
t_stat = result['T'].values[0]
df = result['dof'].values[0]
p_value = result['p_val'].values[0]
cohens_d = result['cohen_d'].values[0]
ci = result['CI95'].values[0]
ci_lower, ci_upper = ci[0], ci[1]
# Report
print(f"t({df:.0f}) = {t_stat:.2f}, p = {p_value:.3f}")
print(f"Cohen's d = {cohens_d:.2f}, 95% CI [{ci_lower:.2f}, {ci_upper:.2f}]")
import pingouin as pg
# One-way ANOVA
aov = pg.anova(dv='score', between='group', data=df, detailed=True)
print(aov)
# If significant, conduct post-hoc tests
if aov['p_unc'].values[0] < 0.05:
posthoc = pg.pairwise_tukey(dv='score', between='group', data=df)
print(posthoc)
# Effect size
eta_squared = aov['np2'].values[0] # Partial eta-squared
print(f"Partial η² = {eta_squared:.3f}")
import statsmodels.api as sm
from statsmodels.stats.outliers_influence import variance_inflation_factor
# Fit model
X = sm.add_constant(X_predictors) # Add intercept
model = sm.OLS(y, X).fit()
# Summary
print(model.summary())
# Check multicollinearity (VIF)
vif_data = pd.DataFrame()
vif_data["Variable"] = X.columns
vif_data["VIF"] = [variance_inflation_factor(X.values, i) for i in range(X.shape[1])]
print(vif_data)
# Check assumptions
residuals = model.resid
fitted = model.fittedvalues
# Residual plots
import matplotlib.pyplot as plt
fig, axes = plt.subplots(2, 2, figsize=(12, 10))
# Residuals vs fitted
axes[0, 0].scatter(fitted, residuals, alpha=0.6)
axes[0, 0].axhline(y=0, color='r', linestyle='--')
axes[0, 0].set_xlabel('Fitted values')
axes[0, 0].set_ylabel('Residuals')
axes[0, 0].set_title('Residuals vs Fitted')
# Q-Q plot
from scipy import stats
stats.probplot(residuals, dist="norm", plot=axes[0, 1])
axes[0, 1].set_title('Normal Q-Q')
# Scale-Location
axes[1, 0].scatter(fitted, np.sqrt(np.abs(residuals / residuals.std())), alpha=0.6)
axes[1, 0].set_xlabel('Fitted values')
axes[1, 0].set_ylabel('√|Standardized residuals|')
axes[1, 0].set_title('Scale-Location')
# Residuals histogram
axes[1, 1].hist(residuals, bins=20, edgecolor='black', alpha=0.7)
axes[1, 1].set_xlabel('Residuals')
axes[1, 1].set_ylabel('Frequency')
axes[1, 1].set_title('Histogram of Residuals')
plt.tight_layout()
plt.show()
import pymc as pm
import arviz as az
import numpy as np
with pm.Model() as model:
# Priors
mu1 = pm.Normal('mu_group1', mu=0, sigma=10)
mu2 = pm.Normal('mu_group2', mu=0, sigma=10)
sigma = pm.HalfNormal('sigma', sigma=10)
# Likelihood
y1 = pm.Normal('y1', mu=mu1, sigma=sigma, observed=group_a)
y2 = pm.Normal('y2', mu=mu2, sigma=sigma, observed=group_b)
# Derived quantity
diff = pm.Deterministic('difference', mu1 - mu2)
# Sample
trace = pm.sample(2000, tune=1000, return_inferencedata=True)
# Summarize
print(az.summary(trace, var_names=['difference']))
# Probability that group1 > group2
prob_greater = np.mean(trace.posterior['difference'].values > 0)
print(f"P(μ₁ > μ₂ | data) = {prob_greater:.3f}")
# Plot posterior
az.plot_posterior(trace, var_names=['difference'], ref_val=0)
Effect sizes quantify magnitude, while p-values only indicate existence of an effect.
See references/effect_sizes_and_power.md for comprehensive guidance.
| Test | Effect Size | Small | Medium | Large |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| T-test | Cohen's d | 0.20 | 0.50 | 0.80 |
| ANOVA | η²_p | 0.01 | 0.06 | 0.14 |
| Correlation | r | 0.10 | 0.30 | 0.50 |
| Regression | R² | 0.02 | 0.13 | 0.26 |
| Chi-square | Cramér's V | 0.07 | 0.21 | 0.35 |
Important: Benchmarks are guidelines. Context matters!
Most effect sizes are automatically calculated by pingouin:
# T-test returns Cohen's d
result = pg.ttest(x, y)
d = result['cohen_d'].values[0]
# ANOVA returns partial eta-squared
aov = pg.anova(dv='score', between='group', data=df)
eta_p2 = aov['np2'].values[0]
# Correlation: r is already an effect size
corr = pg.corr(x, y)
r = corr['r'].values[0]
Always report CIs to show precision:
from pingouin import compute_effsize_from_t
# For t-test
d, ci = compute_effsize_from_t(
t_statistic,
nx=len(group1),
ny=len(group2),
eftype='cohen'
)
print(f"d = {d:.2f}, 95% CI [{ci[0]:.2f}, {ci[1]:.2f}]")
Determine required sample size before data collection:
from statsmodels.stats.power import (
tt_ind_solve_power,
FTestAnovaPower
)
# T-test: What n is needed to detect d = 0.5?
n_required = tt_ind_solve_power(
effect_size=0.5,
alpha=0.05,
power=0.80,
ratio=1.0,
alternative='two-sided'
)
print(f"Required n per group: {n_required:.0f}")
# ANOVA: What n is needed to detect f = 0.25?
anova_power = FTestAnovaPower()
n_per_group = anova_power.solve_power(
effect_size=0.25,
ngroups=3,
alpha=0.05,
power=0.80
)
print(f"Required n per group: {n_per_group:.0f}")
Determine what effect size you could detect:
# With n=50 per group, what effect could we detect?
detectable_d = tt_ind_solve_power(
effect_size=None, # Solve for this
nobs1=50,
alpha=0.05,
power=0.80,
ratio=1.0,
alternative='two-sided'
)
print(f"Study could detect d ≥ {detectable_d:.2f}")
Note: Post-hoc power analysis (calculating power after study) is generally not recommended. Use sensitivity analysis instead.
See references/effect_sizes_and_power.md for detailed guidance.
Follow guidelines in references/reporting_standards.md.
Group A (n = 48, M = 75.2, SD = 8.5) scored significantly higher than
Group B (n = 52, M = 68.3, SD = 9.2), t(98) = 3.82, p < .001, d = 0.77,
95% CI [0.36, 1.18], two-tailed. Assumptions of normality (Shapiro-Wilk:
Group A W = 0.97, p = .18; Group B W = 0.96, p = .12) and homogeneity
of variance (Levene's F(1, 98) = 1.23, p = .27) were satisfied.
A one-way ANOVA revealed a significant main effect of treatment condition
on test scores, F(2, 147) = 8.45, p < .001, η²_p = .10. Post hoc
comparisons using Tukey's HSD indicated that Condition A (M = 78.2,
SD = 7.3) scored significantly higher than Condition B (M = 71.5,
SD = 8.1, p = .002, d = 0.87) and Condition C (M = 70.1, SD = 7.9,
p < .001, d = 1.07). Conditions B and C did not differ significantly
(p = .52, d = 0.18).
Multiple linear regression was conducted to predict exam scores from
study hours, prior GPA, and attendance. The overall model was significant,
F(3, 146) = 45.2, p < .001, R² = .48, adjusted R² = .47. Study hours
(B = 1.80, SE = 0.31, β = .35, t = 5.78, p < .001, 95% CI [1.18, 2.42])
and prior GPA (B = 8.52, SE = 1.95, β = .28, t = 4.37, p < .001,
95% CI [4.66, 12.38]) were significant predictors, while attendance was
not (B = 0.15, SE = 0.12, β = .08, t = 1.25, p = .21, 95% CI [-0.09, 0.39]).
Multicollinearity was not a concern (all VIF < 1.5).
A Bayesian independent samples t-test was conducted using weakly
informative priors (Normal(0, 1) for mean difference). The posterior
distribution indicated that Group A scored higher than Group B
(M_diff = 6.8, 95% credible interval [3.2, 10.4]). The Bayes Factor
BF₁₀ = 45.3 provided very strong evidence for a difference between
groups, with a 99.8% posterior probability that Group A's mean exceeded
Group B's mean. Convergence diagnostics were satisfactory (all R̂ < 1.01,
ESS > 1000).
Consider Bayesian approaches when:
See references/bayesian_statistics.md for comprehensive guidance on:
This skill includes comprehensive reference materials:
comprehensive_assumption_check(): Complete workflowcheck_normality(): Normality testing with Q-Q plotscheck_homogeneity_of_variance(): Levene's test with box plotscheck_linearity(): Regression linearity checksdetect_outliers(): IQR and z-score outlier detectionWhen beginning a statistical analysis:
For questions about:
Key textbooks:
Online resources:
Prerequisites
Time Estimate
15-45 minutes depending on use case complexity
Steps
Common Pitfalls
✓ Do
✗ Don't
💡 Pro Tips
✓ Use when
Use when skill capabilities match your task, clear ROI on time saved, and you can validate outputs. Best for repetitive tasks, learning, and quality improvement.
✗ Avoid when
Avoid when task requires deep expertise you can't validate, involves sensitive decisions, or when learning process is more valuable than speed of completion.
K-Dense-AI/scientific-agent-skills
K-Dense-AI/scientific-agent-skills
K-Dense-AI/scientific-agent-skills
K-Dense-AI/scientific-agent-skills
google-deepmind/science-skills
BuilderIO/skills
I recommend statistical-analysis for anyone iterating fast on agent tooling; clear intent and a small, reviewable surface area.
We added statistical-analysis from the explainx registry; install was straightforward and the SKILL.md answered most questions upfront.
I recommend statistical-analysis for anyone iterating fast on agent tooling; clear intent and a small, reviewable surface area.
statistical-analysis fits our agent workflows well — practical, well scoped, and easy to wire into existing repos.
Solid pick for teams standardizing on skills: statistical-analysis is focused, and the summary matches what you get after install.
statistical-analysis is among the better-maintained entries we tried; worth keeping pinned for repeat workflows.
Keeps context tight: statistical-analysis is the kind of skill you can hand to a new teammate without a long onboarding doc.
statistical-analysis has been reliable in day-to-day use. Documentation quality is above average for community skills.
Solid pick for teams standardizing on skills: statistical-analysis is focused, and the summary matches what you get after install.
We added statistical-analysis from the explainx registry; install was straightforward and the SKILL.md answered most questions upfront.
showing 1-10 of 26