Skill UI

This guide teaches authors how to structure and write a concise, evidence-based response during the academic rebuttal window (e.g., TACAS). It focuses on correcting factual misreadings, proving algorithm soundness, addressing evaluation fairness, and providing verifiable evidence, rather than rewriting the paper. It emphasizes brevity and targeted argumentation.

A comprehensive guide for academic authors on how to transition raw research findings into a clear, explicit, and highly significant statement of knowledge. It teaches authors how to frame their contribution—whether it's a new theory, a refined measurement, or a policy implication—to satisfy journal requirements and reviewer skepticism, ensuring the paper clearly answers the question: 'What does the field now know?'

A comprehensive preflight checklist designed for submitting academic manuscripts to major journals. It ensures strict compliance with publishing standards, covering double-blind anonymization, required AI disclosure statements, ORCID linking, adherence to specific formatting rules (e.g., Chicago style, page limits), and data authenticity requirements for research integrity.

This skill assists software engineers through the entire technical job search cycle. It provides structured analysis for job descriptions (identifying must-haves, red flags), optimizes CVs for specific roles, guides writing compelling cover letters, evaluates total compensation packages, and crafts professional post-interview follow-up emails, ensuring the job search process is professional and highly targeted.

A comprehensive guide for historical scholars to evaluate their manuscript's suitability for The American Historical Review (AHR). It helps authors gauge if their historical argument has sufficient significance beyond a specialized subfield, covering historiographical stakes, deep primary source integration, and adherence to academic norms (Chicago style, double-blind review).

This comprehensive skill guides authors submitting research to The Burlington Magazine. It outlines the rigorous academic standards required for object-based art history, focusing on connoisseurship, attribution, and provenance. It ensures manuscripts are tightly argued using primary source evidence, technical findings, and close visual examination, helping authors align their work with the journal's specific evidentiary bar and house style.

This skill guides authors through the rigorous evaluation process for targeting The Economic Journal (EJ). It assesses whether a manuscript has compelling general interest, sound methodology, and broad applicability beyond a niche field. It covers structural requirements, expected evidence quality, and common submission pitfalls, helping authors strategically position their work for a wide academic readership.

A comprehensive guide for authors targeting The EMBO Journal. This tool helps assess if a mechanistic molecular or cell biology manuscript is a good fit for the journal's rigorous standards. It covers required mechanistic depth, multi-line evidence expectations, house style, and provides a detailed, up-to-date submission checklist, ensuring authors maximize their chances of successful publication.

This skill guides authors on whether their British, European, or world history manuscript is appropriate for The English Historical Review (EHR). It details the journal's high standards for archival and empirical rigor, primary source command, historiographical placement, and formatting requirements (Chicago house style, double-blind review). Use this to check fit, refine arguments, and avoid common academic pitfalls.

This skill provides an expert evaluation framework for manuscripts concerning modern European history. It assesses whether a deep archival study possesses the necessary interpretive significance and historiographical intervention required by leading academic journals, such as The Journal of Modern History. Use it to refine scope, check scholarly rigor, and prepare for high-stakes academic submissions.

This comprehensive skill guides authors on submitting manuscripts to The Journal of Roman Studies (JRS). It outlines JRS's core expectation: an original argument built directly on primary evidence (inscriptions, texts, artifacts, etc.). It covers disciplinary standards for Roman history, archaeology, epigraphy, and literature, ensuring submissions are appropriately framed and methodologically sound before actual submission.

This skill guides authors through the demanding requirements of publishing in The Plant Journal. It evaluates whether a plant-science manuscript provides a fully resolved, mechanistic gene-to-function narrative. It checks for necessary evidence across genetics, biochemistry, and cell biology, ensuring the work meets the highest standards of molecular rigor for top-tier scientific publication.