Skill UI

This guide provides a highly strategic protocol for drafting the single-page rebuttal memo required for top-tier academic conferences, such as RSS. It teaches authors how to tailor their response for the Area Chair (AC), focusing on maximum impact with minimal words. Key strategies include prioritizing critical objections, citing evidence using coordinates (e.g., Table 3, row 4), and making controlled scope concessions rather than re-running experiments or thanking reviewers extensively. This maximizes the chances of influencing the final review decision.

A comprehensive guide for ensuring robust scientific reproducibility in robotics research (RSS). It structures evidence into distinct 'Replication Tiers' (e.g., Rerunnable, Auditable), distinguishing between the computational half (code, seeds) and the physical half (robot, environment, human protocol). It mandates the use of platform ledgers and raw trial logs to convert claims of trust into verifiable, auditable evidence.

This skill provides a detailed framework for researchers to determine the most suitable venue (e.g., RSS, ICRA, CoRL, IROS) for their robotics project paper. It teaches how to shift focus from merely demonstrating a system's capabilities to articulating a precise, testable scientific claim, ensuring the work is optimally presented to the target academic community.

This guide provides a comprehensive project management framework for submitting research to major robotics conferences, particularly RSS. It maps out the complex annual cycle, from abstract submission to final presentation, detailing critical deadlines, required milestones (like hardware trials and writing drafts), and fallback options at sibling venues (IROS, CoRL, ICRA). Essential for researchers managing time-sensitive academic pipelines.

This skill guides authors through the complex process of selecting the optimal academic journal venue for their research. It profiles the paper's characteristics (discipline, method, contribution) and shortlists potential targets from a large index. It scores candidates based on fit, acceptance odds, turnaround time, and audience, providing a tiered recommendation (Reach, Match, Safe) and a detailed resubmission ladder. Ideal for rejected drafts or papers needing a first target.

This comprehensive tool guides researchers in drafting rigorous, point-by-point responses to referee reports (R&R). It ensures that every comment is systematically addressed, classifying fixes and providing structured revisions. Critically, it mandates that all substantive fixes must be backed by real, reproducible re-runs, citing specific numbers generated via an execution bridge to maintain scientific rigor.

A protocol designed to rehearse the rigorous academic peer review process before actual submission. It simulates an Associate Editor's initial desk-screen and incorporates multiple independent referee perspectives (e.g., identification, robustness). The output provides a calibrated decision band and a prioritized, skill-mapped list of required fixes, helping authors predict and address potential weaknesses.

A critical pre-submission tool that provides a comprehensive go/no-go scorecard for academic manuscripts. It evaluates nine dimensions—including fit, robustness, and venue mechanics—to catch avoidable desk-reject risks before the author submits the paper. It scores the manuscript against the target venue's specific requirements and provides actionable feedback on gaps and necessary revisions.

This toolkit guides the entire academic publishing lifecycle, acting as a central router across multiple venues. It sequences critical steps—from selecting the ideal target journal (`rt-journal-match`) through data execution, submission readiness checks, simulated referee review, point-by-point rebuttal drafting, and generating the final replication package. It provides a structured, end-to-end process for researchers submitting complex manuscripts.

This skill provides a comprehensive guide for academic manuscript submission to 'Rural Economy.' It helps users evaluate if their research topic, methodology, and structure align with the journal's academic scope, covering critical areas like rural revitalization, county economy, and agricultural policy. It outlines key structural requirements and common submission pitfalls to enhance the chances of acceptance.

This comprehensive guide provides structured rules for writing the two most critical components for high-impact scientific submissions (like Science/AAAS): a one-sentence summary and a polished abstract. It teaches authors how to shift focus from methodology to quantified results and broad implications, ensuring the work is accessible and compelling to a general scientific readership.

Provides comprehensive guidelines for designing high-impact scientific figures for major academic journals. It covers technical aspects like optimal sizing, font legibility, and colorblind safety, while also enforcing strict data visualization practices (e.g., using dot plots over bars, defining 'n', ensuring data integrity). Use this as a final quality check before submission to guarantee scientific rigor and maximize publication chances.