Menu

Individual skill

eccv-author-response

0upvotes

Use when drafting an ECCV rebuttal — the optional one-page, two-column PDF answering three-plus reviews inside a nine-day window (reviews May 2, rebuttal due May 11 in 2026), with references counted inside the page, no venue-forbidden extras, and arguments sized for the area-chair discussion that follows.

ECCV-Skills/skills/eccv-author-response/SKILL.md

Read pinned source

Source commit 932eb23331721b16e967c59f093781be1928b498

What was checked

Matches the observed repository HEAD
Yes
Scanner rules are current
Yes
Repository scan complete
No
Skill scan complete
Yes
Observed behavior
Network or broad shell
Last checked
Nov 9, 2026

These are observations at the recorded commit, not a guarantee of safety. Review the source before running it.

Install this skill

Choose an agent in your Stack or copy a command below. Commands fetch the pinned commit and copy only this skill directory. Existing destinations are refused. Copying a command does not install anything.

An install command is unavailable: current rules, complete repository and skill scans, an eligible behavior level and a permitted license are required.

Repository context

Repository stars (not skill ratings)
1,405
Repository last updated
Sep 27, 2026
License
MIT

Observed agent integration: No specific integration evidence. Standard SKILL.md installation does not imply verified compatibility.

Files and excerpt

File metadata and permitted, redacted excerpts come from the recorded scan. Source links are pinned to that commit.

Browse files
Read excerpt

# ECCV Author Response

Use this when ECCV reviews land. In the 2026 cycle reviews were released
May 2, the rebuttal was due May 11, and reviewers received rebuttals on
May 12 — nine calendar days to answer everything. The rebuttal was optional,
a single-page PDF **including references**, set in a two-column rebuttal
template even though the paper itself is single-column LNCS.

## What the one page is for

The rebuttal's real reader is the area chair running the post-rebuttal
discussion, not the reviewer who wrote the complaint. Write each block so an
AC can lift it directly into a meta-review: objection, answer, pointer into
the submitted PDF.
Back to top