Use when drafting AISTATS author responses or author-reviewer discussion replies under OpenReview, text-only discussion, no-link guidance, no revised-paper upload, anonymity requirements, and decision-focused clarification strategy.
Scanned 6/4/2026
Install to Claude Code
npx -y skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill aistats-author-response --agent claude-codeInstalls into .claude/skills of the current project.
Are you the author of Aistats Author Response?
Add the live security badge to your README — it updates automatically with every re-scan.
[](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/brycewang-stanford-aistats-author-response)More formats (shields.io, HTML) on the badges page.
---
name: aistats-author-response
description: Use when drafting AISTATS author responses or author-reviewer discussion replies under OpenReview, text-only discussion, no-link guidance, no revised-paper upload, anonymity requirements, and decision-focused clarification strategy.
---
# AISTATS Author Response
Use this after AISTATS reviews are released. Reopen the current OpenReview instructions and
author-discussion policy before drafting because response mechanics are cycle-specific.
## Triage
- Answer concerns that affect correctness, novelty, statistical validity, clarity,
reproducibility, or fit for AISTATS.
- Use existing submitted evidence: paper sections, appendices, supplementary material,
theorem statements, experiments, checklist entries, and code/data descriptions.
- Keep the reply anonymous. Do not reveal institution, authorship, grants, private URLs, or
repository ownership.
- Treat discussion as clarification, not revision. Do not depend on uploading a revised paper
or new supplement unless current instructions explicitly allow it.
- If current rules prohibit links, do not use URLs in the discussion. AISTATS 2026
author-reviewer discussion was text-only and links were not allowed.
- Correct factual errors first, then address requests for missing comparisons, uncertainty
estimates, proofs, or hyperparameters.
## Drafting pattern
1. State the decision-critical correction or concession.
2. Point to exact submitted evidence.
3. Explain the statistical or theoretical consequence.
4. Promise a camera-ready wording fix only if it does not add unsupported new claims.
## Output format
```text
[Priority issue] <reviewer concern>
[Decision dimension] correctness / novelty / statistical validity / clarity / reproducibility
[Draft response] <AISTATS-ready anonymous text>
[Evidence anchor] <paper/appendix/supplement item>
[Forbidden content removed] <links, identity leaks, new unsupported claims>
```
Is this your skill, or is something wrong with this listing? Request removal or report an issue. Author removals are honored within 72 hours.
No comments yet. Be the first to comment!