From iclr-skills
Drafts ICLR OpenReview author responses including public/private comments, revision summaries, and strategy for addressing reviewer concerns.
How this skill is triggered — by the user, by Claude, or both
Slash command
/iclr-skills:iclr-author-responseThe summary Claude sees in its skill listing — used to decide when to auto-load this skill
Use this after ICLR reviews arrive. ICLR discussion is not just a static rebuttal: authors can
Use this after ICLR reviews arrive. ICLR discussion is not just a static rebuttal: authors can answer reviewers, clarify misunderstandings, make visible revisions when allowed, and help the AC evaluate whether concerns are resolved.
Every word you post on OpenReview is visible permanently and to people far beyond this reviewer: future readers, citers, and program committees. Tone and precision are part of the record.
| Situation | ICLR-tuned move | Avoid |
|---|---|---|
| Reviewer misread a claim | Quote the sentence, point to a revision | Calling the review careless |
| Reviewer wants an ablation | Run it, post the table, upload a revision | "In the final version", no evidence |
| Score seems unmovable | Address the AC-relevant objection, not the digit | Re-arguing minor points |
| Abusive or LLM-written review | Flag confidentially to the AC/PC | Public accusation |
A paper introduces an LLM fine-tuning recipe and reports reasoning gains. A public review says the gains "probably come from extra training tokens, not the method." Instead of debating, the authors post an inline compute-matched control showing the lift persists, upload a revision adding it as Table 4, and reply with a two-line diff map. The AC, reading the public thread, sees a concrete resolution, and the reviewer raises the score in an updated review that also stays public.
[Audience] public / reviewer-only / AC-only / PC escalation
[Decision issue] correctness / novelty / experiments / clarity / ethics / reproducibility
[Reply] <anonymous OpenReview-ready text>
[Revision pointer] <section/table/appendix/file/link>
[Risk note] <whether this should stay public or restricted>
npx claudepluginhub brycewang-stanford/awesome-journal-skills --plugin iclr-skillsDrafts ICML rebuttal responses under double-blind constraints, triaging reviewer objections by soundness, originality, significance, clarity, ethics, and reproducibility.
Plans strategy around the ICLR OpenReview process, including public/private replies, revisions, and escalation.
Drafts and triages NeurIPS OpenReview author responses, rebuttals, and discussion-period replies under current double-blind constraints.