Skill UI

This guide provides a detailed framework for authors to strategically place content within technical conference papers. It outlines the distinct roles of the extended abstract, main body, appendix, and artifact, ensuring that all acceptance-critical information is positioned where reviewers are required to read it. Following these rules maximizes the paper's chances of successful peer review acceptance.

This skill provides expert guidance on evaluating academic manuscripts, particularly those in auditing, accounting, and economics. It helps users determine the suitability of their work for specific, high-level journals (e.g., Auditing and Economics Research). It covers journal positioning, required methodology, structural requirements, common rejection pitfalls, and strategic advice for revision or resubmission.

This skill serves as an expert academic advisor for researchers targeting high-level journals, specifically focusing on the 'Auditing Research' journal. It assesses the suitability of a manuscript (covering auditing, accounting, or corporate governance) against the journal's specific positioning, required structure, common pitfalls, and theoretical depth. It helps authors optimize their writing, improve academic rigor, and determine the best publication venue.

This guide details how to read, interpret, and synthesize artifacts from the central shared workspace, known as the 'bench.' It provides a structured approach to gathering findings, reports, and assessments left by various modules (desks). Use this skill to build comprehensive context, understand cross-desk dependencies, and summarize complex information for an operator.

This comprehensive guide details the rigorous multi-stage peer-review process used by top academic journals, exemplified by BJPS. It covers the standards for double-blind review, the critical initial desk-screening (assessing wide interest and scope), and what external referees evaluate across various academic traditions. Authors should use this resource before submission to pre-empt common failure modes and structure their manuscripts for maximum acceptance chances.

This guide teaches advanced academic researchers how to elevate mere research findings into robust, generalizable theoretical contributions suitable for top-tier journals. It structures the process of building an argument—whether the work is empirical, formal/game-theoretic, or interpretive—by explicitly defining mechanisms, scope conditions, and observable implications. The focus is on the 'portability' of the argument across different countries and subfields.

A comprehensive guide to pressure-test whether a political science project meets the broad, general-interest criteria of the British Journal of Political Science (BJPS). It helps users frame their research question and contribution to maximize its appeal beyond single-country or subfield limitations, advising on optimal format choice and scope definition.

This skill guides the refinement of academic manuscripts for submission to the British Journal of Political Science (BJPS). It ensures the prose is accessible to a broad, international political science audience, enforces Cambridge's Harvard author-date citation style, and strictly adheres to specified word caps (e.g., $\le 150$-word abstracts). Use this skill when drafting introductions, tightening arguments, or formatting the final submission to maximize clarity and professional impact.

This guide helps authors articulate the explicit intellectual contribution of an accounting manuscript, moving beyond merely listing findings. It instructs users on how to frame the contribution based on the research tradition (archival evidence, experimental mechanism, or analytical insight) and connect these findings to tangible implications for accounting practice, standard-setting, and policy.

A comprehensive checklist detailing all mandatory requirements for submitting academic manuscripts (e.g., Contemporary Accounting Research). It verifies compliance on key areas including length limits, abstract word count, separated title pages, blind manuscripts, ethics approval (IRB/REB), data integrity statements, and correct payment proof. Use this before the final upload to ensure maximum readiness and avoid editorial rejection.

A comprehensive guide for authors responding to major or minor revisions following peer review. It details how to systematically triage reviewer reports, plan rigorous new in vivo or human experiments, structure point-by-point rebuttal letters, and maintain scientific rigor while narrowing claims. Designed for biomedical research and academic publishing.

This sophisticated tool is designed to polish scientific manuscripts for high-impact, rigorous journals. It guides users in structuring a mechanistic narrative, ensuring that every claim made in the text is precisely calibrated to the strength of the supporting experimental evidence (e.g., distinguishing correlation from necessity). It focuses on scientific storytelling, nomenclature consistency, and eliminating hype, transforming raw research data into a polished, scholarly article.