118건 · 관련도순
Organize paper reviews into individual concerns and draft responses within venue limits. Track evidence, unanswered issues, and approved commitments, then produce reviewer replies and a revision checklist that can be updated during follow-up rounds.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 영어 요약을 표시하고 있습니다.
Turn paper reviews into structured, professional responses. Classify comments, choose whether to revise, defend, clarify, or propose experiments, and draft a rebuttal that addresses every point with evidence and a respectful tone.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 영어 요약을 표시하고 있습니다.
Turn reviewer comments into a structured response document. The skill classifies concerns, suggests whether to revise, defend, clarify, or experiment, and drafts evidence-based replies while checking completeness, professional tone, and respectful wording.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 영어 요약을 표시하고 있습니다.
Systematic quality check for a completed rebuttal document before submission. Use after Stage 3 document compilation or after Stage 5 final remarks writing to verify completeness, tone, factual accuracy, and structural integrity. Catches common rebuttal errors before they reach reviewers.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
Systematic review response strategy guide for RebuttalStudio. Use when developing response strategies for reviewer comments, deciding how to classify concerns, or choosing between Accept/Defend/Clarify/Experiment approaches at any stage of the rebuttal pipeline.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
Plan, draft, and revise academic papers with support for literature reviews, bilingual abstracts, citation checks, and responses to reviewers. The skill also formats manuscripts for publication requirements and produces Markdown, LaTeX, DOCX, or PDF outputs.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 영어 요약을 표시하고 있습니다.
Organize paper or report submissions with stage-specific checklists and templates. Link checks to actual files, prepare cover letters, and track each reviewer comment alongside the response, revision, and location of the change.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 영어 요약을 표시하고 있습니다.
Win a chargeback dispute — read the reason code, assemble the evidence packet, and write the rebuttal that actually persuades the bank. Use when asked to fight a chargeback, respond to a payment dispute, write a chargeback rebuttal, or contest a customer chargeback. Produces the reason-code decode, the required-evidence checklist for that code, the structured rebuttal letter, and an honest read on whether this one is winnable — so you fight the right disputes and concede the rest. For merchants.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
Plan, triage, and write academic rebuttals and review responses. Use when an AI research agent needs to handle conference, journal, workshop, or grant reviews; classify reviewer concerns; decide what evidence or experiments can change the decision; write an AC-facing executive summary; draft per-reviewer responses; correct factual misunderstandings without sounding hostile; handle novelty, baseline, method, experiment, clarity, and scope objections; or produce a final rebuttal checklist.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
Enhanced academic paper review response workflow with Agy/CLI collaborative analysis and multi-perspective discussion. Produces structured rebuttal documents with evidence-based strategies. Triggers on "rebuttal", "respond to reviewers", "review response", "审稿回复".
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
Condense rebuttal prose into fewer words without changing the original meaning. Use when a response block, paragraph, or selected passage is too long but all technical content, citations, and commitments must stay intact. Supports academic English.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
Verification guide for citations added during rebuttal writing. Use when Stage 2 responses introduce new references, when the Area Chair asks about a cited paper, or when any citation in the rebuttal might have been AI-generated. Prevents the serious credibility damage of fabricated references in reviewer-facing documents.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
Remove AI-generated writing patterns from rebuttal prose to make it sound natural, direct, and authentically human-authored. Use when a Stage 2 refined draft or Stage 4 follow-up response reads too formulaic, robotic, or "GPT-like". Supports academic English.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
Multi-stage rebuttal analysis skill for RebuttalStudio. Use when organizing reviewer comments into stage-specific conference workflows, including stage1 breakdown, stage2 refinement, stage4 multi-round follow-up, and stage5 final remarks generation.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
Stress-test a paper with a focused rejection argument, then have a separate reviewer assess each objection against the current text. The report identifies unresolved weaknesses, their severity, and priority fixes for submission or rebuttal preparation.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 영어 요약을 표시하고 있습니다.
Draft, audit, or revise responses to reviewers for Nature-family journals. Links each reviewer concern to manuscript evidence or a documented change, and identifies unanswered comments, missing author input, and issues that need resolution before submission.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 영어 요약을 표시하고 있습니다.
Prepare a complete scholarly publication package, from manuscript sources and submission attachments to reviewer responses and final files. Organize journal or conference requirements, figure specifications, revision tracking, and repeatable build steps around one authoritative manuscript source.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 영어 요약을 표시하고 있습니다.
Standards and audits for writing academic papers, especially ML/NLP submissions to NeurIPS, ICML, ICLR, ACL, EMNLP, NAACL. Covers the author's house prose rules (zero em dashes, zero fluff, every sentence earns its place), verification of hallucinated claims and hallucinated or malformed bibliography entries, the ACL policy on AI writing assistance and what must be disclosed, and best practices for paper structure, experiments, reproducibility checklists, and rebuttals. Use this skill whenever the user is drafting, editing, polishing, restructuring, or reviewing a paper, abstract, intro, related work, rebuttal, or camera-ready; whenever they ask to "clean up" or "tighten" academic writing; whenever citations or a .bib file need checking; and whenever they ask what has to be disclosed about AI assistance. Reach for it even when the user only says "make this section better", "check my references", or "is this ready to submit".
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
Use rebuttal letter strategist for academic writing workflows that need structured execution, explicit assumptions, and clear output boundaries.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
Use when an American Economic Journal: Macroeconomics (AEJ: Macro) decision letter has arrived (R&R or reject-with-comments) and you need a response-letter strategy and revision plan. Plans the rebuttal and revision; it does not run new identification, model, or robustness work itself (route to those skills).
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
Systematic academic paper review workflow covering self-review before submission and rebuttal writing after receiving reviewer feedback. Triggers on "review paper", "self-review", "write rebuttal", "respond to reviewers", "analyze review comments", "paper review".
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
Use when the user wants to anticipate reviewer questions, select the strongest ablations to present, prepare rebuttals, or identify paper weaknesses before submission. Triggers on phrases like "reviewer questions", "anticipate reviewers", "rebuttal", "paper weaknesses", "defend the paper", or "strengthen the paper".
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
Break down full NeurIPS reviewer responses into structured rebuttal units. Use when input contains NeurIPS reviewer fields (Summary, Strengths and Weaknesses, Questions, Limitations) and numeric scores (Rating, Confidence, Quality, Clarity, Significance, Originality). Splits questions and limitations into granular response items while preserving original wording for quoted issues.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
Break down full ARR (ACL Rolling Review) reviewer responses into structured rebuttal units. Use when input contains ARR reviewer fields (Paper Summary, Strengths, Weaknesses, Comments/Suggestions) and numeric scores (Confidence, Soundness, Excitement, Overall Assessment, Reproducibility). Splits weaknesses and comments/suggestions into granular response items while preserving original wording for quoted issues.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.