Skill UI

This guide provides a crucial late-stage polish for economic manuscripts targeting rigorous, broad-audience journals like the International Economic Review (IER). It focuses on elevating prose, structuring the introduction (four-move approach), and ensuring formal precision while maintaining cross-field legibility. Use this when your content is strong, but the narrative structure or academic writing voice needs sharpening to successfully communicate complex results to diverse referees.

This guide provides comprehensive standards for designing, auditing, and documenting AI experiments for major conferences like IJCAI. It covers establishing strong baselines, conducting ablation studies, and reporting meticulous details on hyperparameters, computational infrastructure, and ethical risks, ensuring maximum reproducibility and academic credibility for AI research.

This guide details best practices for revising technical papers submitted to top AI conferences (e.g., IJCAI). It teaches authors how to structure their work to maximize clarity, emphasize broad AI significance, and ensure the paper is self-contained and accessible to a diverse, cross-disciplinary review committee.

This skill guides authors in refining the core computational or methodological claim of a technical manuscript, especially for journals like IJOC. It teaches how to move beyond merely describing an application and instead rigorously defining what is computationally new, by how much, and against which baseline. It structures the primary contribution sentence to be precise, falsifiable, and method-focused.

This comprehensive guide provides best practices for designing, running, and reporting computational experiments for academic journals. It teaches authors how to make performance claims scientifically defensible by addressing potential referee criticisms (e.g., tuning artifacts, seed luck). It covers advanced statistical techniques (performance profiles, nonparametric tests) and details the full structure required for a complete, verifiable GitHub data deposit.

A comprehensive guide for drafting professional and evidence-based rebuttal letters following major or minor revisions in high-level computing journals. This skill helps authors structure point-by-point responses, address computational objections with re-run evidence, and strategically manage disagreements while maintaining a professional tone.

A comprehensive preflight checklist for authors submitting to the INFORMS Journal on Computing (IJOC) via ScholarOne. This guide details critical academic publishing standards, including the 25-page limit, single-blind review rules, required LaTeX formatting, and the mandatory structure for the GitHub code/data reproducibility deposit. Use this when performing the final checks before submission.

This router guides authors through the entire academic workflow for submissions to the INFORMS Journal on Computing (IJOC). It structures the process from initial topic selection and theory development to data analysis, contribution framing, and rebuttal phase, ensuring the computational contribution is the central focus. It helps authors maintain flow and address the specific demands of the OR/CS intersection.

This guide provides detailed standards for structuring and writing manuscripts submitted to the INFORMS Journal on Computing (IJOC). It mandates a precise, methods-forward, and quantitative voice, ensuring the paper is accessible to both Operations Research (OR) and Computer Science (CS) audiences. Key elements covered include abstract structure (≤300 words, no formulas), rapid contribution framing in the introduction, and using numbered pseudocode for methods.

A comprehensive guide for authors responding to major academic conference reviews (e.g., ACM IMC). It details the strategy for the two distinct review turns: the initial rebuttal and the highly structured, bounded One-Shot-Revision. Learn how to maintain double-blind anonymity, address specific action points, and defend your methodology against common reviewer concerns (e.g., validity, ethics, scope creep).

A comprehensive audit checklist for submitting academic papers to the ACM IMC conference. It covers critical details including double-blind anonymity (scrubbing infrastructure leaks), mandatory Ethics declarations (IRB/Belmont), proper formatting (BBL, acmart), page limits, and cycle planning to minimize desk-reject risks.

A comprehensive guide for drafting and revising academic papers focused on Internet Measurement (IMC). It teaches authors how to restructure their work to prioritize measurable findings, ensuring the narrative leads with the core discovery, making methodologies fully auditable, integrating ethical considerations early, and adopting the appropriate academic discipline for networking conferences.