Skill UI

A comprehensive guide for responding to reviews and comments for the American Journal of Sociology (AJS). It structures persuasive, evidence-based rebuttal letters for Revise-and-Resubmit (R&R) stages or formal author replies to published Comments. Focuses on maintaining academic rigor, addressing conflicting points, and advancing the field's understanding through measured, theoretical engagement.

This guide helps researchers navigate and interpret the rigorous, multi-round developmental review process of the Academy of Management Review (AMR). It explains the core criteria (theoretical contribution, logical soundness) and decision signals, assisting authors in understanding editor priorities and triaging reviewer comments before drafting a response. It is a strategic guide for understanding the academic feedback process.

This guide provides a tactical framework for drafting high-stakes author responses (rebuttals) to peer reviews in top-tier academic conferences. It details how to triage reviewer comments (factual errors, questions, disputes), structure the argument within strict word limits (e.g., 800 words), and maintain a professional, evidence-based tone to maximize the paper's chances of acceptance or major revision.

This skill guides scholars in rigorously evaluating whether a sociology project or paper is suitable for the American Sociological Review (ASR). It focuses on testing the work's broad significance, theoretical payoff across subfields, and structural fit, distinguishing between full articles and focused comments/replies. Use this before significant research investment.

This comprehensive guide teaches the methodology for crafting professional, evidence-based rebuttal letters in response to demanding peer reviews (e.g., Cell). It instructs users on triaging reviewer comments into actionable categories (Do, Defend, etc.), prioritizing necessary new experiments based on impact and feasibility, and systematically addressing the core 'completeness' gaps demanded by top-tier journals, all while maintaining a respectful and academic tone.

A highly specialized guide for drafting a rebuttal letter following a revise-and-resubmit (R&R) at top-tier economics journals. It provides a structured, point-by-point framework for professionally conceding, refuting, or upgrading evidence in response to highly technical peer reviewer comments (e.g., identification, modern DID, inference).

A comprehensive guide for authors submitting to high-level academic journals, specifically detailing how to construct a point-by-point rebuttal letter after receiving R&R (Revision & Resubmission) feedback. Covers advanced econometric topics, identifying common reviewer critiques (e.g., parallel trends, robustness checks, endogeneity), and structuring professional, evidence-based revisions.

This skill provides a structured framework for responding to external referee reports in academic publishing. It guides authors through classifying reviewer comments, planning necessary revisions (experiments, derivations), and drafting meticulous point-by-point rebuttal letters. It emphasizes that the reply must accurately reflect actual changes made to the manuscript, ensuring professional and compliant academic communication.

This skill automates the entire GitHub Pull Request (PR) review cycle, specifically targeting Copilot Code Review comments. It runs a robust loop: automatically triggering reviews, triaging open threads, dispatching parallel fixes that adhere to repo conventions, committing changes, and resolving comments. It continues iterating until the PR is deemed clean and ready for merge, minimizing manual effort and ensuring high code quality.

A comprehensive guide for authors preparing a single-page academic rebuttal for top-tier AI conferences (e.g., CoRL). It details how to structure the response, focusing on maximizing impact through new, compact evidence (tables/figures) rather than verbose prose. Learn to triage reviewer comments, maintain a professional tone for public record, and optimize space for maximum score movement.

A specialized tool designed to guide authors in drafting professional and structured rebuttal letters for academic journals, particularly those in Public Administration. It provides detailed templates and guidance for addressing reviewer comments, focusing specifically on strengthening theoretical frameworks and justifying methodological fits to meet high academic standards.

This guide outlines the specialized strategy for revising academic papers following a panel discussion at Economic Policy (EP). Since the discussants' comments are published alongside the final paper, the rebuttal must be fully integrated into the revised text. It teaches systematic triage—deciding whether to fix, concede, or defend every critique—to maintain academic rigor and policy coherence.