Skill UI

A comprehensive guide to modeling the entire academic review cycle for major NLP conferences like ACL. It details the stages from initial submission (ARR cycle intake) through peer review, author response, meta-review synthesis, commitment decision, and final venue decision (Main Conference, Findings, or Reject). It also outlines the roles of reviewers, area chairs, and program chairs, providing strategic advice for authors on navigating the complex publication landscape.

A comprehensive guide for authors submitting high-impact materials research. It details how to select expert referees (covering synthesis, device, and application domains) and provides actionable strategies to pre-empt common reviewer objections—such as claims of incremental advance, insufficient characterization, or weak benchmarking—thereby strengthening the manuscript's overall rigor and maximizing publication success.

A comprehensive guide for conducting rigorous academic literature reviews. It teaches authors how to critically appraise and synthesize conflicting empirical evidence by weighing findings based on credibility, study design, and contextual differences. The framework ensures balance, maintains objectivity, and elevates the quality of academic scholarship.

This framework provides a rigorous methodology for conducting systematic literature reviews and comprehensive academic syntheses. It guides researchers through building transparent coverage, designing robust coding matrices, and choosing the correct integration method (narrative, systematic, or bibliometric) to move beyond simple summarization and create an auditable intellectual map of a field.

This guide teaches researchers how to construct credible, high-impact synthesis exhibits for academic reviews (e.g., Academy of Management Annals). It focuses on creating framework figures, who-studied-what synthesis tables, and coverage exhibits that summarize existing literature, rather than presenting new primary data estimates. Essential for systematically structuring and communicating complex knowledge fields.

This skill guides authors through evaluating the suitability of their clinical research manuscript for Annals of Internal Medicine. It provides deep insights into the journal's high standards, including specific methodological requirements (CONSORT, PRISMA, STROBE, STARD, TRIPOD), required evidence synthesis depth, ideal scope (RCTs, systematic reviews, guidelines), and current house style guidelines necessary for successful submission.

This comprehensive guide helps authors evaluate the suitability of their manuscript for the Annual Review of Economics. It outlines the journal's specific high standards for scholarly synthesis, emphasizing that the content must provide a balanced, expert intellectual map of an entire subfield, rather than presenting new original empirical results. Use this skill to check fit, understand the invited submission process, and structure a comprehensive review for a broad, educated professional audience.

This skill guides authors on submitting authoritative, synthesized review articles to the Annual Review of Plant Biology. It clarifies the expectations for invited reviews, emphasizing balance, comprehensive synthesis, and forward-looking insights across plant molecular, cellular, and developmental biology. It is essential for authors proposing a review topic or refining their manuscript structure to meet high academic standards.

This router guides the entire lifecycle of writing a comprehensive, integrative review article for the Academy of Management Annals. It is designed to help users sequence their work—from initial topic selection and creating a formal proposal (the gate) to systematic literature synthesis, building an organizing framework, and final revision. It emphasizes the critical, authoritative 'Annals voice' required for field-advancing academic reviews.

This tool serves as the central entry point and orchestrator for drafting an American Political Science Review (APSR) manuscript. It guides authors through the complex academic publishing lifecycle by determining the paper's specific track (e.g., Regular Article, Synthesis, Registered Report) and its current developmental stage (e.g., Idea, Theory, Data Analysis). It does not draft content; rather, it routes the user to the most relevant sub-skill for the next step in the writing process.

A comprehensive guide for critically appraising primary academic studies (e.g., DID, IV, RDD) when writing literature reviews. It teaches how to assess the methodological credibility, robustness, and potential biases of existing evidence, ensuring the synthesis accurately reflects the field's best knowledge rather than merely counting conflicting results.

This guide outlines a systematic methodology for conducting comprehensive literature reviews in economics. It moves beyond simple summarizing by teaching researchers how to build an evidence matrix, ensuring systematic coverage by sweeping databases (JEL codes, keywords, working papers). It is essential for preparing high-impact academic reviews that must prove exhaustive coverage and synthesize complex, often conflicting, findings.