percom-author-response
Use when drafting an IEEE PerCom rebuttal after being invited following the initial reviews, covering the bounded single-round reply that answers explicit reviewer questions, corrects misreadings, points to evidence already in the paper without promising new experiments, and preserves double-blindness.
Profile →npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill percom-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.
# PerCom Author Response Use this after PerCom reviews are released **and you have been invited to submit a rebuttal**. PerCom's rebuttal is a **single, bounded turn**: it answers the reviewers' explicit questions, resolves misunderstandings, and clarifies — and the call states that **new experiments are not expected**. There is no journal-style revision that follows, so the rebuttal must win with the paper you already submitted. It remains **double-blind**: reveal no author, institution, testbed, or dataset-owner identity. ## First: did you clear the early-rejection gate? Papers with no positive review are **early-rejected** before the rebuttal opens — there is no rebuttal to write for those. If you were invited, at least one reviewer sees a path to publication: your job is to give that advocate the answers they need for the TPC discussion, and to neutralize the specific doubts of the others. ## Triage - Answer what affects the decision: significance of the contribution, soundness of the method, **cross-subject / deployment evaluation**, appropriate metrics (F1 vs. pooled accuracy), and clarity. - Use evidence **that already exists in the submitted paper or dataset** — a table, a
- First: did you clear the early-rejection gate?
- Triage
- Structure the bounded reply
- Reviewer pushback patterns
- Anonymity in the rebuttal (easy to slip)
- Calibration
- Output format
What does the percom-author-response skill do?
Use when drafting an IEEE PerCom rebuttal after being invited following the initial reviews, covering the bounded single-round reply that answers explicit reviewer questions, corrects misreadings, points to evidence already in the paper without promising new experiments, and preserves double-blindness.
How do I install it?
Run `npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill percom-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 984 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.