Use when running the final pre-submission preflight for an Academy of Management Journal (AMJ) manuscript — ScholarOne portal, anonymization for double-blind review, AOM house-style formatting, files, and ethics declarations. Checks readiness to submit; it does not handle the post-decision response (amj-rebuttal).
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。
brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills☆ 1,2622026年9月27日 更新
Use when drafting the revision and response letter after an Academy of Management Journal (AMJ) revise-and-resubmit — structuring point-by-point responses to the action editor and reviewers across a multi-round developmental process. Drafts the response after revisions; it does not interpret the decision letter (amj-review-process).
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。
brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills☆ 1,2622026年9月27日 更新
Use when auditing an AAMAS main-track submission for OpenReview readiness, the 8-page-plus-references limit, the full-paper versus 2-page extended-abstract choice, double-blind anonymity, the supplementary zip cap, track fit across the AAAI/JAAMAS/Blue Sky tracks, dual-submission rules, and desk-reject triggers before upload.
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。
brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills☆ 1,2622026年9月27日 更新
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。
brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills☆ 1,2622026年9月27日 更新
Use when the theoretical argument and hypotheses are the bottleneck for an Academy of Management Journal (AMJ) manuscript — building a mechanism and deriving testable hypotheses a priori. Constructs the theory; it does not run the analysis (amj-data-analysis) or write the final contribution paragraph (amj-contribution-framing).
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。
brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills☆ 1,2622026年9月27日 更新
Use when explaining or planning around AAAI's two-phase review process, Phase 1 rejection risk, Phase 2 additional reviews, AI-assisted review pilot, author feedback, SPC/AC discussion, and final decisions.
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。
brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills☆ 1,2622026年9月27日 更新
Use for full-manuscript prose polish of an Academy of Management Journal (AMJ) manuscript — front-loading the argument, active voice, structure, and AOM house style. Polishes language and structure; it does not create the theoretical contribution (amj-contribution-framing) or fix the analysis (amj-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。
brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills☆ 1,2622026年9月27日 更新
Use when strengthening AAMAS reproducibility evidence for interaction claims, including proofs and game definitions, opponent and population sets, self-play protocols, random seeds, compute, uncertainty on strategic outcomes, baselines, and consistency between what the paper claims about agents and what the artifact can actually show.
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。
brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills☆ 1,2622026年9月27日 更新
Use when drafting an AAAI author response (rebuttal) under the single short character-limited author-feedback window, the no-URL rule, no-new-results guidance, AI-generated-review handling, and the AAAI two-phase review process where Phase-2 papers receive one feedback round before SPC/AC discussion.
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。
brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills☆ 1,2622026年9月27日 更新
Use when preparing AAMAS supplementary material - proofs, extended game and mechanism definitions, extra multiagent experiments, opponent-set details, and the anonymized artifact zip - under the size cap, anonymity, and reviewer-discretion limits, including how to split a game-theory-plus-experiments paper across the 8-page body and the supplement.
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。
brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills☆ 1,2622026年9月27日 更新
Use when responding to an Academy of Management Annals (Annals) proposal decision or full-review referee letter — framework/attitude asks, coverage gaps, balance complaints, and accessibility. Drafts the response letter and revision plan; it does not run the portal preflight (amann-submission) or redesign the framework from scratch (amann-organizing-framework).
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。
brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills☆ 1,2622026年9月27日 更新
Use when positioning an AAMAS submission against multiagent, game-theory, and reinforcement-learning literature spread across AAMAS, AAAI, IJCAI, NeurIPS, ICML, EC, and JAAMAS, including arXiv and workshop versions, concurrent submissions, prior conference versions, and the cross-community citation coverage AAMAS reviewers expect.
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。
brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills☆ 1,2622026年9月27日 更新
Use when running the final pre-submission preflight for an Academy of Management Annals (Annals) proposal or invited full review via the Manuscript Central portal — proposal-vs-invited-review route, deadlines, formatting, CV, and anonymity. Final checks; it does not draft content.
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。
brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills☆ 1,2622026年9月27日 更新
Use when building exhibits for an Academy of Management Annals (Annals) review — the signature framework figure, who-studied-what synthesis tables, and search/coverage exhibits that summarize across a literature. Designs review exhibits; it does not produce original-estimate regression tables (an Annals review reports no new data of its own).
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。
brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills☆ 1,2622026年9月27日 更新
Use when the research design and method are the bottleneck for an Academy of Management Journal (AMJ) manuscript — matching design (archival, survey, experiment, multi-method, field) and level of analysis to the theoretical question. Designs the study; it does not run the estimation or validity checks (amj-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。
brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills☆ 1,2622026年9月27日 更新
Use when designing or auditing AAMAS experiments - self-play and population-based training, opponent selection, equilibrium and regret metrics, game-theoretic simulations, ablations, seeds, hyperparameters, compute, and claim-to-evidence fit - with emphasis on experiments that probe the interaction rather than chase a single-agent leaderboard.
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。
brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills☆ 1,2622026年9月27日 更新
Use when strengthening an AAAI paper's reproducibility checklist (placed after references), experimental traceability, seed and hyperparameter reporting, compute and cost disclosure, dataset access and licensing, code/data ZIP readiness, and the claim-to-evidence map that Phase-1 reviewers use to judge rigor across AAAI's broad AI scope.
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。
brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills☆ 1,2622026年9月27日 更新
Use when deciding which amj-* sub-skill to invoke next, or when sequencing manuscript work from topic selection through rebuttal for an Academy of Management Journal (AMJ) manuscript. Routes — it does not replace — the specialized skills.
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。
brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills☆ 1,2622026年9月27日 更新
Use when deciding whether a project is a strong AAMAS fit, comparing AAMAS with AAAI, IJCAI, NeurIPS, ICML, EC, and the JAAMAS journal, identifying whether the agents are truly the research object, naming the interaction primitive (solution concept, mechanism, coordination, negotiation), and sharpening the multiagent 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。
brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills☆ 1,2622026年9月27日 更新
Use when articulating and differentiating the theoretical contribution of an Academy of Management Review (AMR) manuscript — showing precisely what is NEW versus prior theory and why it matters. Frames the contribution; it does NOT build the theory (amr-theory-development) or check its internal logic (amr-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。
brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills☆ 1,2622026年9月27日 更新
Use when planning an AAMAS project timeline from venue fit through abstract, full-paper or extended-abstract upload, supplementary material, the double-blind rebuttal, decision, IFAAMAS camera-ready, registration, and presentation, with track-specific deadlines and backward-planning offsets for a game-theory-plus-experiments paper.
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。
brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills☆ 1,2622026年9月27日 更新
Use when turning results into an explicit theoretical contribution for an Academy of Management Journal (AMJ) manuscript — the "what new theory do we learn?" statement and the discussion section. Frames the contribution and implications; it does not build the original theory (amj-theory-development) or run the analysis (amj-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。
brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills☆ 1,2622026年9月27日 更新
Use when preparing an accepted AAAI paper for camera-ready source submission to AAAI Press, including proceedings page limits, two-column template compliance, copyright transfer, purchased extra technical pages, deanonymization, registration, oral or poster presentation, and final public artifact release.
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。
brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills☆ 1,2622026年9月27日 更新
Use when running and reporting the statistical analysis for an Academy of Management Journal (AMJ) manuscript — measurement validity, common-method bias, the right estimator (HLM, SEM, panel, experiments), endogeneity, and robustness. Executes and reports the analysis; it does not design the study (amj-methods) or frame the contribution (amj-contribution-framing).
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。
brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills☆ 1,2622026年9月27日 更新