hri-author-response
Use when writing the single ACM/IEEE HRI full-paper rebuttal that responds to three external reviewers and two area chairs — triaging study-design and statistics critiques, correcting misreadings, promising only what a camera-ready can deliver, staying anonymous and within the length limit, and giving the online reviewer discussion reasons to raise scores.
Profile →npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill hri-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.
# HRI Author Response (Rebuttal) HRI gives you **one** rebuttal, and it matters: because reviewers **discuss and can revise scores after** it, a focused rebuttal routinely changes decisions. But it is a conference rebuttal, not a journal revise-and-resubmit — you cannot run a new study before the deadline, and there is **no in-cycle major-revision round**. The job is to make the reviewers who read your paper feel their concerns were heard and, where they are genuinely wrong, corrected. Timing for the HRI 2026 cycle: rebuttal due ~12 Nov 2025 (see `resources/official-source-map.md`); confirm the length/format limit in the current instructions (**待核实**). ## Before writing: triage every point For each concern across the three externals and two ACs, sort into: - **Misreading** — the reviewer misunderstood something already in the paper. Correct it crisply, quoting where it is (section/figure), without blaming the reviewer. - **Fixable in camera-ready** — a clarification, an added analysis you already have, a missing citation, a reframed claim. Promise the *specific* change and, where possible, give the result now. - **Real limitation you cannot fix now** — a design choice, a sample bou
- Before writing: triage every point
- Answer the HRI-typical critiques
- Promise only what the camera-ready can deliver
- Structure and constraints
- What not to do
- After the rebuttal
- Output format
What does the hri-author-response skill do?
Use when writing the single ACM/IEEE HRI full-paper rebuttal that responds to three external reviewers and two area chairs — triaging study-design and statistics critiques, correcting misreadings, promising only what a camera-ready can deliver, staying anonymous and within the length limit, and giving the online reviewer discussion reasons to raise scores.
How do I install it?
Run `npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill hri-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.