Skill UI

This guide provides a comprehensive strategy for responding to academic conference reviews, particularly those with no formal rebuttal period (like IROS). It details the three key channels of response: pre-submission objection handling, integrating meta-review feedback into the camera-ready manuscript, and drafting formal response letters or resubmission memos. It emphasizes maintaining scope, transparency, and evidence integrity throughout the process.

A comprehensive guide for managing the high-stakes rebuttal and revision period after major academic conference submissions. It teaches authors how to strategically triage reviewer objections (factual errors, evidence gaps, design flaws) by their leverage, structure the written response for maximum committee impact, and perform surgical revisions without inadvertently restructuring the core paper.

A comprehensive guide for planning and drafting responses to major revisions (R&R) in Information Systems research. It teaches systematic prioritization, focusing first on the Senior Editor's concerns, addressing genre-specific reviewer critiques (e.g., proofs, identification, evaluation), and structuring the response using an electronic companion for maximum impact.

A comprehensive preflight checklist for authors submitting Information Systems Research (ISR) manuscripts to the INFORMS portal. It verifies compliance with strict formatting guidelines, double-anonymization rules, mandatory contribution statements, and required reviewer/editor nominations, ensuring the manuscript is submission-ready.

A comprehensive guide for authors submitting research papers to ISSTA. It details critical steps such as adhering to ACM sigconf formatting, maintaining the 18-page limit, enforcing double-anonymous review, establishing the artifact plan, and managing HotCRP registration to prevent desk rejection.

This comprehensive guide addresses the unique challenges of submitting research to top-tier conferences that do not include formal author-response or major revision rounds. It teaches authors a proactive strategy: how to pre-empt potential reviewer objections (e.g., novelty, scope limitations) by embedding necessary arguments, proofs, and context directly into the initial submission. Furthermore, it provides actionable plans for navigating both acceptance (camera-ready fixes) and rejection (diagnosis and strategic rerouting) without relying on traditional appeal processes.

This comprehensive guide details the rigorous process of transforming a submitted ITCS paper into the final, open-access LIPIcs camera-ready version. It covers critical steps including switching to the required `lipics-v2021` LaTeX class, fully re-attributing author identity (names, ORCIDs, funding), completing structured metadata (ACM CCS, keywords), incorporating reviewer-suggested fixes, and ensuring compliance with strict production standards set by the Dagstuhl editorial office.

A comprehensive guide for authors preparing submissions for the ITCS conference. It details the required format, the two-step submission deadlines (abstract vs. full paper), and critical steps for ensuring the manuscript is fully self-defending, correctly anonymized, and meets the standards for a lightweight, double-blind review process.

A comprehensive guide detailing the entire academic life cycle for submitting to ITCS. It outlines the critical single annual cycle—from abstract submission in early September through review, notification, and final conference presentation in January. Learn how to plan backward from the deadline, especially focusing on strategies for the no-rebuttal format, ensuring your paper preemptively answers reviewer objections.

This comprehensive guide provides a meticulous preflight checklist for submitting manuscripts to highly specialized academic journals, such as JAAR. It ensures adherence to strict double-blind anonymity, structural requirements (broad significance, length, abstract limits), and specific stylistic conventions, significantly reducing the chance of immediate rejection or return for revision before formal peer review.

A comprehensive guide for authors submitting to top-tier chemistry journals like JACS. This skill helps authors pre-empt reviewer objections, select appropriate suggested and excluded experts, and rigorously stress-test the manuscript's scope, characterization, and mechanistic claims before formal submission. It transforms the writing process into a defensible, high-quality academic product.

A comprehensive guide for authors responding to journal reviewers' reports (e.g., JACS). It details how to systematically triage comments into data-required, clarification, or disagreement; how to structure a professional, point-by-point response letter; and how to maintain scientific rigor when performing necessary experiments.