rebuttal-guidance

Files (7)

• SKILL.md
• checklist.md · references/
• concern-classification.md · references/
• mindset-library.md · references/
• mindset-matching-heuristics.md · references/
• response-templates.md · references/
• strategy-dimensions.md · references/

SKILL.md (first lines)

# Rebuttal Guidance

## Overview

This skill delivers **executable rebuttal guidance per concern**: structured plans,
evidence pointers, tone and strategy priorities. It does **not** produce
ready-to-paste rebuttal prose; the author writes the final text.

The core model is **conditional persuasion P(Z=1 | X, Y)**:

- **X**: reviewer mindset (behavior cluster inferred from review text)
- **Y**: rebuttal strategy vector (which tactics to emphasize)
- **Z**: success (score increase or paper accepted)

## When to use

- User pastes Weaknesses / Questions from ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML, EMNLP, etc.
- User asks how to respond to a specific reviewer comment.
- User wants a structured plan before writing rebuttal prose.
- User asks which tone or evidence strategy fits a harsh vs. open reviewer.
- User says "reviewer ignored my rebuttal" and wants to recalibrate.

## When NOT to use

- User wants full rebuttal text copied verbatim → output guidance first; warn
  against blind LLM paste.
- User asks to evaluate a research idea → use `idea-evaluator`.
- User asks for pre-submission paper review → use `pre-submission-reviewer`.
- No review text provided → ask for it first.

---

## Core procedure

### Step 1: Inventory concerns

Extract every numbered Weakness and Question from the pasted review. If the
user pasted only one reviewer's block, ask whether other reviewers exist.

Output a short table:

| ID | Type | One-line summary |
|----|------|-----------------|
| R1.W1 | W | ... |
| R1.Q1 | Q | ... |

### Step 2: Classify each concern

See: [references/concern-classification.md](references/concern-classification.md)

Tag each item as one of:
`misunderstanding | evidence_gap | novelty | baseline_fairness | scope_claim |
writing_clarity | theory | efficiency | other`

### Step 3: Match reviewer mindset (X)

See: [references/mindset-matching-heuristics.md](references/mindset-matching-heuristics.md)

Score the review on 5–7 behavior signals (openness, severity, constructiveness,
specificity, skepticism, harshness, actionability). Map scores to a cluster in
[references/mindset-library.md](references/mindset-library.md).

State: **matched cluster name**, confidence (high / medium / low), and the
specific phrases that triggered the match.

### Step 4: Strategy priorities for this mindset (Y)

From the matched cluster in [references/mindset-library.md](references/mindset-library.md), read:

- **Historical up-rate**: calibrate how likely a score increase is.
- **Rule-stat diffs** (success vs. failure %): boost tactics with positive diff.
- **Cohen's d effects**: highlight dimensions with d > 0.8 in success group.
- **Success / failure patterns**: concrete do's and don'ts from data.
- **Key strategy**: one-sentence summary for this cluster.

Cross-check dimensions in [references/strategy-dimensions.md](references/strategy-dimensions.md).

### Step 5: Per-concern guidance

For each concern, emit a guidance block (not final prose):

```
### R?.W?: [short title]
- **Concern type**: ...
- **Mindset-aware strategy**: ...
- **Recommended structure**: Acknowledge → Response → Evidence → Revision note
- **Clarify from paper?**: yes/no: where to look (section, table, appendix)
- **New experiment needed?**: yes/no: what exactly (no fabricated numbers)
- **Tone note**: ...
- **Template**: A / B / C: see references/response-templates.md
- **Avoid**: ...
```

Do **not** fabricate experimental numbers. Mark anything unverified as
`[TO VERIFY]`.

### Step 6: Integrity gate

Before finalizing, run through [references/checklist.md](references/checklist.md).

Key flags:
- Every W/Q has a guidance block.
- No fabricated numbers.
- Defensive phrases (e.g., "you misunderstood") flagged.
- Overpromise risk flagged for scope_claim and evidence_gap types.

### Step 7: Output format

Deliver a `## Rebuttal Guidance` section containing:

1. **Reviewer mindset summary**: cluster name, confidence, identifying phrases.
2. **Global strategy priorities**: 3–5 bullets from mindset data.
3. **Per-concern guidance**: Step 5 blocks for each W/Q.
4. **Checklist highlights**: pass/fail on key integrity items.

---

## Reference map

From zms618/no-heartburn-academic-skills, MIT.

More from zms618/no-heartburn-academic-skills