Use when drafting ICML rebuttals and reviewer-author discussion replies under OpenReview, double-blind constraints, one-round discussion expectations, and no revised-paper upload.
Scanned 6/5/2026
Install to Claude Code
npx -y skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill icml-author-response --agent claude-codeInstalls into .claude/skills of the current project.
Are you the author of Icml Author Response?
Add the live security badge to your README — it updates automatically with every re-scan.
[](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/brycewang-stanford-icml-author-response)More formats (shields.io, HTML) on the badges page.
---
name: icml-author-response
description: Use when drafting ICML rebuttals and reviewer-author discussion replies under OpenReview, double-blind constraints, one-round discussion expectations, and no revised-paper upload.
---
# ICML Author Response
Use this after initial ICML reviews arrive. The response should clarify and correct; it cannot rely
on uploading a revised paper during the feedback period.
## ICML response model
ICML 2026 author instructions state that authors can respond after initial reviews, that reviewers
see those responses after the response period, and that reviewers and authors may then have one
additional communication round. Responses must remain anonymous and should not contain
non-anonymized URLs, personal websites, or shortened URLs. Reviewer instructions tell reviewers to
explain whether the rebuttal changed their final recommendation.
## Triage logic
- Prioritize objections that affect soundness, originality, significance, clarity, ethics, or
reproducibility.
- Answer the AC's likely decision question, not every minor reviewer note.
- Treat contradictions between reviewers as a chance to give the AC a clean synthesis.
- Use new analyses sparingly and only to clarify an existing claim.
- Keep all links anonymous and policy-compliant. Reviewers are not expected to follow external URLs
in responses.
## Drafting pattern
1. Open with the central correction or concession.
2. Refer to exact paper sections, appendix items, figures, tables, or supplement files.
3. State what will change in camera-ready only if the paper is accepted.
4. Maintain a professional, concise tone.
5. Avoid identity leakage, score arguments, and broad promises.
## Output format
```text
[Priority issue] <reviewer/AC concern>
[Decision dimension] soundness / originality / significance / clarity / ethics / reproducibility
[Draft response] <ICML-ready anonymous text>
[Evidence anchor] <paper/appendix/supplement item>
[Discussion follow-up] <one possible reply if reviewer pushes back>
```
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!