nlp-rebuttallisted

# NLP Rebuttal Scenario Playbook Translated and adapted from [MLNLP-World/Paper-Rebuttal-Tips](https://github.com/MLNLP-World/Paper-Rebuttal-Tips). 28 recurring reviewer-concern scenarios. Each has four parts: the concern, a bad answer that backfires, a recommended answer template, and the takeaway. **Good rebuttal = Respect + Evidence + Clarity.** ## How to use 1. Classify each reviewer comment with the router below. 2. Load ONLY the reference file(s) for the matched tips. 3. Adapt the recommended-answer template: replace every placeholder (XXX, A/B/C, Table X) with the paper's real content and freshly computed numbers. Never ship a template verbatim. 4. For overall response structure, ordering, and tone, use the `write-rebuttal` skill (itemize → brain-dump → draft → revise, the 18 tactics, the neutral-third-party test). These two skills compose: that one shapes the whole response, this one shapes each answer. ## Concern router | Reviewer concern sounds like | Tip | Reference | | --- | --- | --- | | "Too complex", "bag of tricks", "which component matters?" | 1 | [innovation-theory.md](references/innovation-theory.md) | | "Not novel", "similar to prior work A" | 2 | innovation-theory.md | | "Just a combination of existing techniques" | 3 | innovation-theory.md | | "Contributions unclear" | 4 | innovation-theory.md | | "Motivation unclear", "why is this problem important?" | 5 | innovation-theory.md | | "No theoretical analysis", "why does it work?" | 6 |