dac-author-response
Use when handling reviewer feedback for an ACM/IEEE Design Automation Conference (DAC) Research Manuscript — writing a concise, evidence-first rebuttal IF the cycle runs an author-response period (verify; DAC has historically not), and otherwise converting DAC reviews into a targeted response-to-reviewers when rerouting a rejected paper to ICCAD, DATE, ASP-DAC, or a journal.
Profile →npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill dac-author-response --agent claude-code
Same command for any agent — swap --agent for codex, cursor, copilot.
Weekly change comes from our own snapshots, not the repository page — it measures attention, not adoption.
# DAC Author Response Handle reviews with DAC's process in mind. The single most important fact: DAC's Research-Manuscript review has **historically been TPC-driven without an author rebuttal period**, and whether the current cycle runs one is **待核实** (`resources/official-source-map.md`). So this skill covers two situations, and the second is the common one. ## Situation A — the cycle runs a response period (verify first) If — and only if — the live DAC cycle offers an author response, treat it as a **short, factual correction channel**, not a debate. EDA reviewers reject mostly on **baseline fairness, benchmark credibility, and scalability**; a response moves a borderline paper when it supplies a *number* or corrects a *factual misreading*, and moves nothing when it argues taste. Priorities for a tight EDA rebuttal (assume a strict word budget): 1. **Fix factual errors first** — a reviewer who thinks you did not compare against tool X when Table 2 does; point to the table. 2. **Answer the baseline objection with evidence** — if a reviewer names a stronger baseline, report the number if you have it, or commit precisely to what you will add and why it will not change the conclusion.
- Situation A — the cycle runs a response period (verify first)
- Situation B — no rebuttal, then a reject (the common case)
- If you reroute to a journal (TCAD/TODAES), a response letter does exist
- What never works
- Output format
What does the dac-author-response skill do?
Use when handling reviewer feedback for an ACM/IEEE Design Automation Conference (DAC) Research Manuscript — writing a concise, evidence-first rebuttal IF the cycle runs an author-response period (verify; DAC has historically not), and otherwise converting DAC reviews into a targeted response-to-reviewers when rerouting a rejected paper to ICCAD, DATE, ASP-DAC, or a journal.
How do I install it?
Run `npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill dac-author-response --agent claude-code` — it drops the skill into your project so the agent can pick it up. Swap the --agent value for codex, cursor or copilot if you use one of those.
Where does this skill come from?
From brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills, a repository with 909 stars. We read it straight from the repository tree rather than a submitted listing, so what you see here is what is actually published.
Is a popular skill a good skill?
Not necessarily. Stars measure attention, not adoption — a repository can trend for a week and be abandoned. That is why we show the weekly change from our own snapshots next to the total, instead of a single flattering number.