Rebuttal Revision Strategy

Read First

• references/peer-review-policy.md

• references/research-positioning-policy.md

Workflow

1. Split every review into atomic concerns.
2. Classify each concern: misunderstanding, valid limitation, missing evidence, writing issue, incorrect claim, scope mismatch, or unfixable weakness.
3. Decide action: concede, clarify, add evidence, reframe, defend, or defer.
4. Draft response with direct answer first, then evidence, then promised change.
5. Avoid new claims that cannot be added to the paper or artifact.
6. Save concern mapping in

   reports/rebuttal/

   .
7. Update manuscript,

   docs/methodology/threats-to-validity.md

   , and wiki claim pages.

Response Pattern

1. thank and acknowledge
2. answer the exact concern
3. cite evidence or planned change
4. state manuscript location to change
5. avoid argumentative tone

Do Not

• Ignore a reviewer concern because it seems unfair.
• Promise experiments that cannot be completed before the deadline.
• Defend a claim that the evidence does not support.
• Write a response that cannot be mirrored in the revised paper.