Skill UI

A comprehensive guide for structuring the Related Work section for top-tier recommender systems conferences (RecSys). It advises authors on auditing novelty by positioning their contribution against adjacent research fields (e.g., SIGIR, KDD, WSDM), addressing critical lines (like reproducibility and off-policy evaluation), and ensuring the work is technically distinct from prior or concurrent studies.

This guide helps researchers determine if their project's core contribution is genuinely centered on recommender systems. It provides a structured fit test to route the work to the most appropriate top-tier venue (RecSys, SIGIR, KDD, etc.) and select the correct conference track before starting the writing process.

This guide outlines how to strategically frame a manuscript's contribution for journals like the Review of Economic Dynamics (RED). It emphasizes identifying a single, sharp, dynamic or quantitative advance (e.g., a new mechanism, method, or quantitative result) and presenting it as a 'delta' against the closest existing model. It provides a checklist and stress test to ensure the core finding is immediately grasped by the target readership.

A detailed guide for structuring the introduction and related work sections of manuscripts submitted to Review of Economic Dynamics (RED). It teaches authors how to accurately map their contribution within established quantitative modeling traditions (e.g., DSGE, HANK), explicitly identifying the quantitative gap and the marginal theoretical advance for a specialized readership.

This guide helps researchers test whether their economic research question aligns with the specialized scope of top-tier journals, particularly those focusing on dynamic and quantitative mechanisms (like RED). It provides a structured methodology, including fit tests and scoring dimensions (Dynamics, Model, Discipline, Audience), to ensure the core contribution is genuinely dynamic and methodologically rigorous.

A comprehensive academic skill designed to guide authors targeting top-tier Chinese policy journals, such as 'Reform.' It helps assess whether a manuscript's core contribution, methodology, and research focus align with the journal's scope (e.g., economic reform, public policy, institutional change). The tool covers academic standards, common pitfalls, necessary structural adjustments, and adherence to specific citation styles (GB/T 7714).

This skill guides authors needing to assess the suitability of their research on resource efficiency, waste management, or recycling for the journal Resources, Conservation & Recycling. It provides detailed expectations regarding Material Flow Analysis (MFA), Substance Flow Analysis (SFA), and the necessity of presenting quantified, measurable circularity contributions, ensuring rigorous methodological alignment with the circular economy framework.

This guide helps authors transform raw research results into a clear, theory-driven, and policy-relevant scholarly contribution. It focuses on articulating the 'Before $ ightarrow$ After' knowledge shift—what the field previously believed versus what the paper now proves—and ensuring the policy implication is logically earned from the estimated mechanism, rather than being a generic add-on.

This guide teaches authors how to properly position their research contribution within a specialized academic field, particularly for journals like Research Policy. It instructs users on how to move beyond simple citation lists by identifying a clear, theoretical knowledge gap (a tension) in the existing literature. By anchoring the work in foundational canons and naming the prevailing consensus, authors can structure a compelling argument that defines what the field should believe after reading the paper.

A comprehensive guide for drafting a structured, point-by-point rebuttal letter in response to major/minor research policy revisions. It teaches how to synthesize conflicting referee comments into a coherent plan, defend core innovation claims with evidence, and manage the handling editor's expectations, ensuring the original contribution is protected throughout the revision process.

A comprehensive guide for authors detailing the entire academic submission lifecycle for Research Policy (RP). It covers the double-blind review process, the role of handling editors, how desk rejects are assessed (scope vs. contribution), and strategies for planning major and minor revisions. This resource helps authors set realistic expectations and plan their next steps before drafting the formal response letter.

This guide assists in building a robust theoretical framework for research policy manuscripts. It moves beyond simple empirical measurement by structuring the argument using the innovation-mechanism chain (antecedent → mechanism → outcome). It teaches how to connect firm-level findings up to the systemic policy or institutional level, ensuring the contribution is theoretically advanced and legible across disciplines (e.g., economic, managerial, STS).