「contribution」の検索結果

Use when targeting Journal of Hydrology or deciding whether a hydrology manuscript fits this venue. Encodes the journal's fit, the broad process/observational/applied-hydrology contribution bar, data-and-reproducibility expectations, Elsevier house style, official-submission re-check, and desk-reject heuristics.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Use when deciding whether a project is a strong AISTATS fit, comparing AISTATS with NeurIPS, ICML, ICLR, UAI, COLT, JMLR, statistics journals, or application venues, identifying the statistical primitive of the contribution, and sharpening the AI-statistics framing before writing begins.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Use when targeting the Journal of Cleaner Production or deciding whether a cleaner-production/sustainability manuscript fits this venue. Encodes the journal's fit, the cleaner-production contribution and methodological-transparency bar, LCA/system-boundary expectations, house style, official-submission re-check, and desk-reject heuristics.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Use when targeting Water Resources Research (WRR) or deciding whether a hydrology / water-science manuscript fits this venue. Encodes the journal's fit, the quantitative water-science contribution bar, data-and-code deposition expectations, AGU house style, official-submission re-check, and desk-reject heuristics.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Use when building the conceptual/theoretical argument of an American Anthropologist (AA) manuscript into a four-field contribution — whether the work is ethnographic, archaeological, biological, or linguistic. AA rewards a portable concept and reflexive argument over a bare finding or thick description alone. Structures the argument; it does not run analyses or write fieldnotes.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Use when writing the response to an American Anthropologist (AA) revise-and-resubmit. AA uses anonymous peer review under an ethics of care, often with cross-subfield reviewers, so the response must convert each reviewer while keeping the editor confident and the ethnographic contribution intact. Structures the response letter; it does not fabricate new evidence.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Use when deciding which English agriculture / environment / earth-science journal skill to invoke next, comparing fit across the 30-journal agriculture-and-environment roadmap, or routing a manuscript before venue-specific re-framing. Routes by sub-field (agronomy / plant / soil / food / environment / earth / climate), contribution type, and evidence shape (field trial / lab assay / observational survey / model / dataset).

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Use when targeting Resources, Conservation & Recycling or deciding whether a resource-efficiency/circular-economy manuscript fits this venue. Encodes the journal's fit, the materials-and-waste circularity contribution bar, material-flow-analysis expectations, house style, official-submission re-check, and desk-reject heuristics.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Use when targeting Agronomy for Sustainable Development or deciding whether an agronomy / farming-systems manuscript fits this venue. Encodes the journal's fit, the explicit-and-evidenced sustainability-contribution bar, evidence and data-reporting expectations, house style, official-submission re-check, and desk-reject heuristics.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Use when the contribution of an American Economic Journal: Microeconomics (AEJ: Micro) manuscript is fuzzy or oversold relative to the closest existing results. Stakes the theorem-relative delta against the nearest theory; it does not build the model (see aejmic-theory-model) or frame the prose (see aejmic-writing-style).

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Use when targeting the Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society (BAMS) or deciding whether a broad-interest atmospheric/oceanic/hydrologic-sciences contribution fits this venue. Encodes the journal's review-and-community positioning, the broad-audience-significance bar, synthesis and field-campaign expectations, AMS house style, official-submission re-check, and misfit heuristics.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Use when positioning the contribution of an American Economic Review: Insights (AER: Insights) short-format manuscript against the closest published work in one or two tight paragraphs. Stakes the gap concisely; it does not write the full literature review (there is no room for one).

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Use when judging whether a research idea fits Administrative Science Quarterly (ASQ) and has the *surprising* theoretical insight ASQ demands. Sharpens the puzzle and the contribution claim; it does not design the study or write theory sections.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Use when deciding whether a project fits AEJ: Economic Policy rather than J. Public Economics, AEJ: Applied, or AER, and when sharpening the policy question and its welfare stake for an AEJ: Economic Policy manuscript. Frames fit and the policy-question-first contribution; it does not design the identification or run estimation.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Use when deciding whether a security project fits ACM CCS versus IEEE S&P, USENIX Security, NDSS, PETS, or a crypto/theory venue, identifying the security contribution type, and sharpening the threat model and attacker capability before writing begins.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Use when revising an ACM MM (ACM Multimedia) paper for house style — putting the cross-modal contribution on the first page, framing media (figures, video, audio) as evidence rather than decoration, making the fusion the visible claim, and compressing the argument into a 6-8 page ACM sigconf body with references-only overflow.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Use when building or repairing the literature review for 《会计研究》 (Accounting Research) — entering the accounting research lineage (earnings quality, conservatism, audit quality, disclosure, value relevance) rather than piling recent Chinese empirical citations, and positioning the gap as an accounting contribution.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Use when deciding whether a project fits ACL versus EMNLP, NAACL, EACL, TACL, Computational Linguistics, COLM, or an ML venue, covering contribution typing for NLP work, long-versus-short paper choice, the annual theme track, Findings-tier expectations, and sharpening the computational-linguistics framing before writing starts.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Use when articulating what an Accounting, Organizations and Society (AOS) manuscript contributes — converting findings into a claim that changes how the field understands accounting's social, organizational, behavioral or institutional operation. Frames the payoff; it does not produce new analysis (aos-data-analysis).

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Use when framing or sharpening a topic for 《会计研究》 (Accounting Research) — turning a generic "X affects Y" empirical idea into an accounting contribution anchored in China's institutional setting, accounting theory, and standard-setting / practice relevance. Use before literature review.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Use when revising an AAAI manuscript for broad-AI-audience fit, a first-page contribution statement legible to non-specialist Phase-1 reviewers, two-column readability, concise novelty claims, reproducibility-checklist alignment, hedged limitations and ethics, and policy-aware framing of AI-system and capability claims.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Use when revising an AAMAS paper so the interaction contribution leads the first page, the solution concept or incentive property is named, the game and agents are legible, claims are paired with proofs or multiagent experiments, the argument fits eight two-column pages plus references, and the wording stays double-blind.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Use when revising an Academy of Management Annals (Annals) review for the house voice — authoritative, integrative, agenda-setting "reviews with an attitude," with a strong problem-first opening and a contribution-stating abstract. Polishes prose and structure; it does not design the framework (amann-organizing-framework) or run the submission preflight (amann-submission).

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Use when scoping or sanity-checking a research question for an Academy of Management Journal (AMJ) manuscript — fit, theory-drivenness, and feasibility. Decides whether the idea can earn a theoretical contribution; it does not build the theory itself (use amj-theory-development) or position the literature (amj-literature-positioning).

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。