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.
インストールする前に、エージェントに与えられる指示の中身を確認できます。
Apply the shared template first:
skills/stage1/template/SKILL.mdThen apply only the NeurIPS-specific overrides below.
Extract exactly these six keys (numbers only):
rating <- NeurIPS Rating / Overallconfidence <- NeurIPS Confidencequality <- NeurIPS Qualityclarity <- NeurIPS Claritysignificance <- NeurIPS Significanceoriginality <- NeurIPS OriginalityScores may appear as 3: good or 5: Accept — extract the leading number only.
summary <- Summarystrength <- Strengths And WeaknessesQuestions (label as weakness)Limitations (label as question)# Stage1 NeurIPS Breakdown## Scores must contain exactly the six keys above.Limitations field sometimes contains a standard phrase ("The authors thoroughly discussed the limitations of their work.") — preserve it verbatim rather than splitting into atomic issues if it is a single affirmative statement.4: excellent) — extract only the numeric portion.まだレビューはありません。使ってみた感想をお寄せください。
概要と使いどころ
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.
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。
Summarize extracted paper text into concise Markdown memory for later Stage 2 and Stage 4 background use, with fixed section headings and no fabricated 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。
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.
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。
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.
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。
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.
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。
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.
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。