Unverified50% confidenceDecision RuleExact time
The Response should be consistent with the Rebuttal, as SACs can see the full review history and inconsistencies will seriously undermine credibility.
1
Sources
50%
Confidence
Long-term
Relevance
8/6/2026
First Seen
Sources
AACL Commitment指南：Response to Metareview写作技巧与模板
Related Claims
UnverifiedRebuttal can improve scores but has limited effect; its core value lies in clarifying reviewers' misunderstandings, supplementing experimental data, and resolving reproducibility disagreements.75% similarUnverified当rebuttal无法有效影响评分时，整个评审系统就失去了自我修正的能力，破坏了评审分数作为质量信号的可信度73% similarUnverifiedSACs typically do not re-read every paper in depth, and in borderline cases rely heavily on the Meta-Review and the authors' Response to make their decisions.64% similarUnverified遇到报错时正确做法是把报错信息完整复制给 Codex，让它解释原因并修复61% similarUnverified评估分数依赖测试数据集，数据集随业务变化会导致评分漂移，使历史横向比较产生误导60% similar
Cite This Claim
Stable URI
https://kongchang.com/claim/694364API
curl https://kongchang.com/api/v1/knowledge/claims/694364MCP
get_claim(id=694364)