Skill UI

This guide details the unique and transparent submission process for Games and Economic Behavior (GEB). It clearly explains the roles of the publicly known Editor-in-Charge, anonymous Advisory Editors, and referees, describing the 'single-anonymized' review model. It helps authors set realistic expectations regarding the high standards, low acceptance odds (~15% published), and critical points for improving their manuscripts before submission.

This guide ensures that manuscripts for Global Environmental Change (GEC) are rigorous and highly readable for an interdisciplinary, policy-relevant audience. It focuses on polishing prose, front-loading contributions, minimizing jargon, and structuring discussions to meet strict word and abstract caps, ensuring clarity across environmental science, governance, and policy domains.

This skill guides the rigorous process of building and auditing dense legal footnote apparatus, specifically for Harvard Law Review (HLR) standards. It ensures every proposition is supported by the cited source at the exact page, verifies quote accuracy, and prepares a verifiable source file, making the submission 'pull-ready' for demanding academic review.

A comprehensive guide for structuring and writing rigorous, interdisciplinary Human-Robot Interaction (HRI) papers for top-tier academic venues. This skill emphasizes leading with the human-robot interaction problem, explicitly defining the research gap, stating hypotheses, and ensuring that claims are proportional to the evidence, all while adhering to strict academic page budgets.

A comprehensive guide on how to structure the 'Related Work' section for top-tier theoretical computer science conferences (like ICALP). It teaches authors how to prove their results are genuinely new and better by precisely comparing their bounds against the best known literature, correctly crediting prior venues (STOC, FOCS, etc.), and maintaining academic rigor under double-blind guidelines.

A comprehensive guide detailing the high-stakes, single-round, correctness-centered peer review process for top-tier theoretical computer science conferences like ICALP. It outlines the unique two-track system (Track A and Track B), review criteria, and provides actionable advice on interpreting reviewer feedback and structuring submissions compared to other major venues.

This guide provides strict guidelines for structuring technical conference papers, especially when supplementary proofs are required. It emphasizes the critical rule that the main body (typically 15 pages) must be self-contained and sufficient for a referee to judge the result's significance, even if they do not read the marked appendix. It strictly forbids external links or online supplements for review.

A comprehensive guide for structuring and polishing scholarly review articles for a broad academic audience. It ensures the writing adopts an authoritative, highly accessible, and forward-looking narrative arc, guiding the author to move beyond mere summary and establish a clear research agenda.

A comprehensive guide for drafting and revising academic papers, particularly in the field of Large Language Models (LLMs). It teaches how to adopt the measurement-forward, evidence-based register required by top-tier conferences like COLM. Focus areas include leading with findings, strictly scoping claims to tested models and versions, structuring content for tight page limits, and maintaining a measured, critical voice.

A comprehensive guide for researchers responding to 'Revise and Resubmit' (R&R) decisions, particularly in Comparative Political Studies. It provides a structured framework for drafting the response letter, ensuring every point from reviewers and editors is addressed point-by-point. Focus areas include strengthening comparative leverage, addressing rival explanations, and maintaining professional, evidence-based argumentation.

A comprehensive guide for developing robust and general economic models suitable for top-tier theoretical journals like the International Economic Review (IER). It teaches authors how to identify load-bearing assumptions, analytically prove existence and uniqueness, and structure arguments to demonstrate that results are intrinsic properties of the economy, not mere artifacts of functional form.

A comprehensive guide detailing the review journey for the INFORMS Journal on Computing (IJOC). It outlines key gates, including the Area-Editor suitability check and single-blind refereeing, and provides strategies for interpreting decisions (reject, major/minor revision). This resource helps authors plan their submissions, triage feedback, and determine if a sibling journal is a better fit.