# Evidence-Bound Rebuttal and Revision

Use this playbook for an authorized review response, rebuttal, revision letter, or shepherd response. Preserve confidentiality, venue policy, deadlines, response limits, and the historical research record.

## Intake

Verify the review package, decision letter, reviewer labels, current official response rules, deadline and timezone, permitted artifact changes, anonymity constraints, dialogue and artifact languages, and accountable author. Do not inspect or transmit confidential review material outside the authorized boundary.

## Build the response register

Create `research/review-response.csv` when durable tracking is useful. Split compound reviews into atomic items and classify each as:

- clarification or misunderstanding;
- missing explanation or citation;
- validity threat;
- requested analysis or experiment;
- scope or positioning disagreement;
- presentation or reproducibility issue;
- policy, ethics, or disclosure issue;
- unsupported or impossible request.

Bind each response to affected claim IDs, evidence IDs, manuscript locations, and concrete changes. A proposed new experiment must pass the same design, authority, cost, and evidence gates as any other experiment; a deadline does not make an invalid test valid.

## Response discipline

- Acknowledge valid issues directly and state what changed.
- Correct misunderstandings with precise manuscript or evidence references, not tone or status claims.
- Narrow or withdraw claims when the criticism exposes an evidence gap.
- Label new analyses and experiments accurately; never rewrite them as prespecified.
- Disagree respectfully when evidence supports disagreement, and identify the exact scope of remaining uncertainty.
- Do not promise work that cannot be completed or verified within the response boundary.
- Keep the point-by-point response consistent with the revised manuscript and supplement.

## Completion

Run a cross-reference and claim-strength pass, verify compliance with current response rules, and obtain accountable author approval. Report unresolved reviewer items, changes that require new evidence, and any claim narrowed or withdrawn. The external response or resubmission remains human-owned.