review-response

Start by classifying each comment as a Major Issue, Minor Issue, Typo, or Misunderstanding, then apply a matching strategy: Accept, Defend, Clarify, or Experiment. Structure each response with a thank-you, your reply, and the specific changes made with section and page references.

Use the Clarify strategy: politely point to the existing content with exact section, page, and line references, then improve the wording so the point is more prominent. Avoid phrases like 'the reviewer is wrong' and instead acknowledge the confusion and revise for clarity.

NeurIPS rebuttals emphasize conceptual novelty and broader impact, ICML focuses on theoretical rigor and proofs, and ICLR prioritizes thorough experiments, honest limitations, and LLM usage disclosure. The Skill provides venue-specific templates and emphasis guidance for each.

Only promise experiments that are feasible within the rebuttal period. If results are ready, present them with concrete numbers and locations; if not feasible, explain the constraint and offer an alternative experiment or analysis that addresses the core concern.

Avoid defensive or dismissive language such as 'the reviewer is wrong', 'obviously', or one-word replies like 'Fixed'. Every response should open with thanks, use 'we', cite specific locations, and describe concrete changes made to the manuscript.