Individual skill
imc-author-response
Use when drafting ACM IMC author responses, covering the initial-review rebuttal and — distinctively — the One-Shot-Revision resubmission that must address a bounded set of action points, keep double-blind anonymity, satisfy the reviewer champion, and be re-judged by the same reviewers at the next deadline.
IMC-Skills/skills/imc-author-response/SKILL.md
Source commit 932eb23331721b16e967c59f093781be1928b498
What was checked
- Matches the observed repository HEAD
- Yes
- Scanner rules are current
- No
- Repository scan complete
- No
- Skill scan complete
- Yes
- Observed behavior
- Not checked yet
- 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)
- 1,409
- Repository last updated
- Sep 27, 2026
- License
- MIT
Observed agent integration: No specific integration evidence. Standard SKILL.md installation does not imply verified compatibility.
- academic-writing Repository topic
- agent-skills Repository topic
- journal Repository topic
- academic-research Repository topic
- ai-agents Repository topic
- anthropic Repository topic
- awesome-list Repository topic
- claude Repository topic
- claude-code Repository topic
- economics Repository topic
- engineering Derived category
Files and excerpt
File metadata and permitted, redacted excerpts come from the recorded scan. Source links are pinned to that commit.
Browse files
SKILL.mdcore · 5,185 bytes
Read excerpt
# IMC Author Response
Use this after IMC reviews are released. IMC has **two distinct speaking turns**, and conflating
them is a common mistake: a short initial rebuttal, and — if you receive a **One-Shot-Revision** —
a revised paper plus a change summary that the *same* reviewers re-read at the *next* deadline
against a *bounded* set of action points. Both must respect double-blind anonymity: no author,
institution, testbed, or vantage-point identity may leak.
## Triage (both turns)
- Answer what affects the decision: significance of the finding, vantage-point representativeness,
ground truth, methodology soundness, confounds/limitations, **ethics**, and artifact
availability.
- Use evidence that already exists or that the revision will concretely add — never a vague