Rebuttal Guidance
Provides actionable peer-review rebuttal guidance (not full rebuttal prose) using...
Install
npx skills add HKUSTDial/Supervisor-Skills --skill rebuttal-guidance -g -a claude-code -y- Repository
- HKUSTDial/Supervisor-Skills11.3k
- Category
- Engineering
- Updated
- 20d ago
- License
- See repository
- Context cost
- Lightabout 1,192 tokens
- Runs scripts
- No, instructions only
What it does
Provides actionable peer-review rebuttal guidance (not full rebuttal prose) using conditional persuasion P(Z|X,Y): match reviewer mindset X, recommend strategy Y, optionally ground in manuscript evidence and similar successful historical (review, rebuttal) pairs. Use when the user pastes reviewer comments, asks for rebuttal help, rebuttal guidance, response to reviewers, how to reply to R1.W2, OpenReview rebuttal, or the reviewer ignored the rebuttal.
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
Tag each item as one of:
misunderstanding | evidence_gap | novelty | baseline_fairness | scope_claim | writing_clarity | theory | efficiency | other
