Hypothesis Generation
spacering-net/codeg
Structured hypothesis formulation from observations. An agent skill from spacering-net/codeg.
A skill your agent uses when reasoning about how an IEEE ICSME research submission is evaluated, covering double-anonymous review, the early-decision cut that issues Accept/Reject before the…
Install Icsme Review Process
$ npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill icsme-review-process -a claude-codeProject install by default; add -g for ~/.claude/skills/.
$ gh skill install brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills icsme-review-process --agent claude-codeProject scope by default; add --scope user for a personal install. Needs GitHub CLI 2.90.0 or later (public preview).
$ git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills.git skills-src && mkdir -p .claude/skills && cp -r skills-src/ICSME-Skills/skills/icsme-review-process .claude/skills/icsme-review-process && rm -rf skills-srcUse ~/.claude/skills/ instead of .claude/skills for a personal install. The folder must contain SKILL.md.
Claude Code skills documentation · loads skills from .claude/skills/
Install the "icsme-review-process" agent skill from https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills/tree/main/ICSME-Skills/skills/icsme-review-process into .claude/skills/icsme-review-process/ in this project. Copy the whole folder (SKILL.md and every file beside it), keep the folder name "icsme-review-process", then confirm the skill loads.Claude Code copies the folder itself, the same result as the manual copy. Check what it changed before you commit it.
$skill-installer install https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills/tree/main/ICSME-Skills/skills/icsme-review-processType this inside Codex. $skill-installer <name> installs a curated skill from openai/skills. The installer writes to $CODEX_HOME/skills (default ~/.codex/skills). Restart Codex if the skill does not show up.
$ npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill icsme-review-process -a codexProject install goes to .agents/skills/; add -g for ~/.codex/skills/.
$ gh skill install brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills icsme-review-process --agent codexProject scope by default (.agents/skills/); add --scope user for a personal install.
$ git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills.git skills-src && mkdir -p .agents/skills && cp -r skills-src/ICSME-Skills/skills/icsme-review-process .agents/skills/icsme-review-process && rm -rf skills-srcUse ~/.agents/skills/ instead of .agents/skills for a personal install.
Codex skills documentation · loads skills from .agents/skills/
Install the "icsme-review-process" agent skill from https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills/tree/main/ICSME-Skills/skills/icsme-review-process into .agents/skills/icsme-review-process/ in this project. Copy the whole folder (SKILL.md and every file beside it), keep the folder name "icsme-review-process", then confirm the skill loads.Codex copies the folder itself, the same result as the manual copy. Check what it changed before you commit it.
$ npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill icsme-review-process -a cursorProject install goes to .agents/skills/; add -g for ~/.cursor/skills/.
$ gh skill install brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills icsme-review-process --agent cursorProject scope by default (.agents/skills/); add --scope user for a personal install.
$ git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills.git skills-src && mkdir -p .cursor/skills && cp -r skills-src/ICSME-Skills/skills/icsme-review-process .cursor/skills/icsme-review-process && rm -rf skills-srcUse ~/.cursor/skills/ instead of .cursor/skills for a personal install.
Cursor skills documentation · loads skills from .cursor/skills/, .agents/skills/, .claude/skills/, .codex/skills/
Install the "icsme-review-process" agent skill from https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills/tree/main/ICSME-Skills/skills/icsme-review-process into .cursor/skills/icsme-review-process/ in this project. Copy the whole folder (SKILL.md and every file beside it), keep the folder name "icsme-review-process", then confirm the skill loads.Cursor copies the folder itself, the same result as the manual copy. Check what it changed before you commit it.
$ gemini skills install https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills.git --path ICSME-Skills/skills/icsme-review-process--scope user (default) or --scope workspace; --path is the subfolder of the repo that holds the skill; --consent skips the security confirmation prompt.
$ npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill icsme-review-process -a gemini-cliProject install goes to .agents/skills/; add -g for ~/.gemini/skills/.
$ gh skill install brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills icsme-review-process --agent gemini-cliProject scope by default (.agents/skills/); add --scope user for a personal install.
$ git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills.git skills-src && mkdir -p .gemini/skills && cp -r skills-src/ICSME-Skills/skills/icsme-review-process .gemini/skills/icsme-review-process && rm -rf skills-srcUse ~/.gemini/skills/ instead of .gemini/skills for a personal install, then run /skills reload.
Gemini CLI skills documentation · loads skills from .gemini/skills/, .agents/skills/
Install the "icsme-review-process" agent skill from https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills/tree/main/ICSME-Skills/skills/icsme-review-process into .gemini/skills/icsme-review-process/ in this project. Copy the whole folder (SKILL.md and every file beside it), keep the folder name "icsme-review-process", then confirm the skill loads.Gemini CLI copies the folder itself, the same result as the manual copy. Check what it changed before you commit it.
$ gh skill install brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills icsme-review-processInstalls for Copilot at project scope by default; add --scope user for a personal install. Preview a skill first with gh skill preview. Needs GitHub CLI 2.90.0 or later (public preview).
$ npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill icsme-review-process -a github-copilotProject install goes to .agents/skills/; add -g for ~/.copilot/skills/.
$ git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills.git skills-src && mkdir -p .github/skills && cp -r skills-src/ICSME-Skills/skills/icsme-review-process .github/skills/icsme-review-process && rm -rf skills-srcUse ~/.copilot/skills/ instead of .github/skills for a personal install. Commit .github/skills so cloud agent and code review can use it.
GitHub Copilot skills documentation · loads skills from .github/skills/, .claude/skills/, .agents/skills/
Install the "icsme-review-process" agent skill from https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills/tree/main/ICSME-Skills/skills/icsme-review-process into .github/skills/icsme-review-process/ in this project. Copy the whole folder (SKILL.md and every file beside it), keep the folder name "icsme-review-process", then confirm the skill loads.GitHub Copilot copies the folder itself, the same result as the manual copy. Check what it changed before you commit it.
$ npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill icsme-review-process -a opencodeOpenCode documents no install command of its own. Project install goes to .agents/skills/; add -g for ~/.config/opencode/skills/.
$ gh skill install brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills icsme-review-process --agent opencodeProject scope by default (.agents/skills/); add --scope user for a personal install.
$ git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills.git skills-src && mkdir -p .opencode/skills && cp -r skills-src/ICSME-Skills/skills/icsme-review-process .opencode/skills/icsme-review-process && rm -rf skills-srcUse ~/.config/opencode/skills/ instead of .opencode/skills for a personal install.
OpenCode skills documentation · loads skills from .opencode/skills/, .claude/skills/, .agents/skills/
Install the "icsme-review-process" agent skill from https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills/tree/main/ICSME-Skills/skills/icsme-review-process into .opencode/skills/icsme-review-process/ in this project. Copy the whole folder (SKILL.md and every file beside it), keep the folder name "icsme-review-process", then confirm the skill loads.OpenCode copies the folder itself, the same result as the manual copy. Check what it changed before you commit it.
Facts
- Skill name
icsme-review-process- GitHub stars
- 1.2k
- Token cost
- ~1.5k tokens
- SKILL.md length
- 679 words
- Files
- 1
- Skills in repo
- 2,387
- Repo updated
- First seen
- Licence
- MIT
At a glance
A skill your agent uses when reasoning about how an IEEE ICSME research submission is evaluated, covering double-anonymous review, the early-decision cut that issues Accept/Reject before the…
- Reasoning about how an IEEE ICSME research submission is evaluated
- SKILL.md covers Process model, Reading your early decision, How ICSME differs from its… and Who reads you, plus 4 more sections
- Instructions only: no scripts, shell commands, URLs or credentials in SKILL.md
- Covering double-anonymous review
What it does
Icsme Review Process is an agent skill from brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills. Use when reasoning about how an IEEE ICSME research submission is evaluated, covering double-anonymous review, the early-decision cut that issues Accept/Reject before the rebuttal, the "Response Recommended" author-response period, the single-round accept/reject model with no Major Revision, and how ICSME's process differs from FSE's journal-style round and ICSE's cycles.
Its SKILL.md is about 1.5k tokens, which your agent loads only when the skill is triggered. It is a single SKILL.md file with no bundled scripts.
It sits in Research & Science. The repository describes itself as: Journal-specific Claude Code/Codex skill packs covering mainstream journals — AER, QJE, Nature, Cell, 管理世界, 经济研究 & 200+ more — your fast track to getting published. ｜ 覆盖主流期刊的… The licence is MIT.
When your agent uses it
- Reasoning about how an IEEE ICSME research submission is evaluated
- Covering double-anonymous review
- The early-decision cut that issues Accept/Reject before the rebuttal
- The Response Recommended author-response period
Example prompts
- “Response Recommended”
- “s process differs from FSE”
- “/icsme-review-process”
What it can do on your machine
Read from SKILL.md and the folder at commit 932eb23. It shows what the files ask for, not the result of running them.
Tool permissions
Pre-approves nothing: there is no allowed-tools line, so your agent's usual permission prompts apply.
From allowed-tools in the SKILL.md frontmatter.
Runs code
No scripts in the folder and no shell commands in SKILL.md.
From the folder's file list and the shell code blocks in SKILL.md.
Network
No URLs in SKILL.md.
From URLs in SKILL.md, links to its own repository left out.
Credentials
Names no API keys, tokens, secrets or passwords.
From names ending in _API_KEY, _TOKEN, _SECRET, _KEY or _PASSWORD in SKILL.md.
Context cost
Icsme Review Process loads about 1.5k tokens when it runs. Until then it costs about 99 tokens; SKILL.md has 679 words of instructions outside code blocks.
Estimates: characters ÷ 4, the usual rule of thumb; real counts depend on the model's tokenizer. Scripts and assets cost tokens only if the agent reads them.
Safety
Auto-check passed
The automated check found no risky patterns in SKILL.md.
Automated static check — not a guarantee. Review scripts before installing. It scans the text of SKILL.md for risky patterns (piping downloads into a shell, reading credential files, hidden Unicode, destructive commands); files beside SKILL.md are not scanned.
SKILL.md
The full file from brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills at commit 932eb23, republished under its MIT licence (© brycewang-stanford). 679 words, ~1,530 tokens.
Download SKILL.mdSave it as
.claude/skills/icsme-review-process/SKILL.md (or your agent's skills folder).- name
- icsme-review-process
- description
- Use when reasoning about how an IEEE ICSME research submission is evaluated, covering double-anonymous review, the early-decision cut that issues Accept/Reject before the rebuttal, the "Response Recommended" author-response period, the single-round accept/reject model with no Major Revision, and how ICSME's process differs from FSE's journal-style round and ICSE's cycles.
ICSME Review Process
Model the pipeline before interpreting any single review. ICSME's process is conference-style and single-round: papers are reviewed once, double-anonymously, and the outcome is accept or reject — there is no journal-style Major Revision. The distinctive mechanism authors must plan for is the early-decision cut: before the rebuttal even opens, the strongest and weakest papers are already decided, and only the middle is asked to respond.
Process model
- Submission and review run on EasyChair with double-anonymity: author identities are hidden from reviewers throughout.
- Each paper is read by multiple program-committee members who weigh the significance of the maintenance/evolution contribution, soundness of method, quality and honesty of the empirical evidence (mined data, subject systems, statistics), threats-to-validity reasoning, clarity, and open-science support.
- At the start of the author-response period the PC issues an early decision:
- Accept — reviewers agree the paper is publishable as is; no response requested.
- Reject — reviewers judge the paper too deficient for a response to change; no response requested.
- Response Recommended — the paper is in contention; authors may answer the PC's specific questions.
- After responses and PC discussion, a final accept/reject is issued. Accepted papers publish in IEEE Xplore.
Reading your early decision
| Early decision | What it means | Author move |
|---|---|---|
| Accept | Contribution and evidence hold; polish only | Camera-ready + ROSE artifact; do not reopen scope |
| Response Recommended | Genuinely in contention; specific PC questions decide it | Answer each question with existing evidence; correct misreadings |
| Reject (early) | Structural: wrong scope, no credible baseline, thin/confounded study | Reroute (SANER/SCAM/journal) or rebuild; do not resubmit unchanged |
The strategic reading: because there is no revision round, write the initial submission so the evidence is already complete. An ICSME reviewer cannot ask you to add an analysis and wait — they either believe the paper now or they do not. The rebuttal moves papers by resolving a specific doubt, not by promising future work.
How ICSME differs from its siblings
- vs. ESEC/FSE: FSE papers are PACMSE journal articles with a real Major Revision revise-and-resubmit round. ICSME has no such round — it is single-shot with an early-decision cut and a rebuttal. Never plan an ICSME submission as if a revision will rescue thin evidence.
- vs. ICSE: ICSE is the general-SE flagship on a larger stage with its own (sometimes multi-cycle) structure. ICSME is the maintenance/evolution-focused venue; a paper accepted at either would differ in framing, not just calendar.
- vs. MSR/SCAM: its co-located siblings review mining-for-its-own-sake and source-analysis machinery; ICSME reviewers ask what the maintenance payoff is.
Show full SKILL.md (271 more words)Show less
Who reads you
Expect maintenance and evolution empiricists. They check whether subject systems are real and evolving, whether the mined corpus is provenance-pinned, whether baselines are fair, whether the threats-to-validity section argues rather than recites, and they often open the artifact. Because ICSME spans techniques, empirical studies, comprehension, and replication, a paper is matched to reviewers from its own subarea — vague method descriptions get caught, not skimmed.
Where author leverage actually exists
[Before submission] topic tags + subject-system realism -> reviewer pool & credibility (largest lever)
[Early-decision cut] nothing to do once issued; it reflects the submitted paper alone
[Response Recommended] the single rebuttal: answer the PC's exact questions with existing evidence
[After reject] no appeal; reroute to a sibling, a journal, or Registered Reports next cycleA response moves borderline papers when it corrects a factual misreading or supplies a number a reviewer said was missing and that already exists in the artifact; it does not move papers when it argues taste or promises new experiments. Silence on a PC question the response was invited to answer is read as inability to answer it.
Reading a review packet
Weight reviews before answering. A review that cites your section numbers, tables, and threats was read closely; its author is your likely advocate if the response holds. Because there is no second read, the PC discussion is where the decision is actually made — write the response as evidence for that discussion, addressed to the specific questions the PC flagged.
Misreadings to avoid
- Expecting a revision round — there is none; the paper is judged as submitted.
- Treating "Response Recommended" as bad news — it means you are in contention and the rebuttal matters; an early Accept or Reject is the terminal signal.
- Treating the response as a debate — the PC discussion decides; answer questions, do not argue.
- Projecting last year's cadence — the early-decision cut and response format are decided per edition; confirm they are offered this cycle.
Output format
[Process stage] pre-submission / awaiting early decision / response period / final / accepted
[Decision category] early accept / response recommended / early reject / final accept / final reject
[Criterion map] each review point -> significance | soundness | evidence | threats | clarity | open-science
[Leverage plan] the response-period answer that can actually change the outcome
[Forbidden moves] identity leak / promising new experiments as if they were done© brycewang-stanford, MIT. Rendered from Markdown: HTML in the file is shown as text, images as links, and headings moved down two levels. Raw file
Files
Just SKILL.md in ICSME-Skills/skills/icsme-review-process of brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills.
Open the folder on GitHubat commit 932eb23
Compare with similar skills
Icsme Review Process next to the 5 skills that share the most tags, products or categories with it. Stars are the repository's; “used in” counts other GitHub owners with a copy.
| Skill | Stars | Used in | Tokens | Auto-check | Licence | Repo updated |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Icsme Review Process this skillbrycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills | 1.2k | — | ~1.5k | Automated safety check: Pass | MIT | |
| Hypothesis Generationspacering-net/codeg | 3.9k | 14 repos | ~3.6k | Automated safety check: Notes | MIT | |
| GitHub Deep Researchbytedance/deer-flow | 84k | 4 repos | ~1.3k | Automated safety check: Pass | MIT | |
| Nature Paper CardYuan1z0825/nature-skills | 47k | 2 repos | ~2.1k | Automated safety check: Pass | Apache-2.0 | |
| Content Research Writerweapp-tailwindcss/weapp-tailwindcss | 1.9k | 25 repos | ~3.5k | Automated safety check: Pass | MIT | |
| Last30daysmvanhorn/last30days-skill | 64k | — | ~7.9k | Automated safety check: Notes | MIT |
Similar skills
GitHub Deep Research
bytedance/deer-flow
Researches a GitHub repository over four rounds using the GitHub API and web search, then writes a structured markdown report with timeline, metrics and Mermaid diagrams.
Nature Paper Card
Yuan1z0825/nature-skills
Builds a structured deep-reading card for one scientific paper, covering methods, how experiments support claims, limitations and research ideas, with a script to prepare the source.
Content Research Writer
weapp-tailwindcss/weapp-tailwindcss
Assists in writing high-quality content by conducting research, adding citations, improving hooks, iterating on outlines, and providing real-time feedback on each section.
Last30days
mvanhorn/last30days-skill
Research what people actually say about any topic in the last 30 days.
Peer Review
spacering-net/codeg
Structured manuscript/grant review with checklist-based evaluation.
More from brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills
All 2,387 skills in this repoAaag Data Analysis
brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills
A skill your agent uses when running and reporting the analysis for an Annals of the American Association of Geographers manuscript — spatial statistics and modeling, remote-sensing accuracy, or…
Aaag Literature Positioning
brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills
A skill your agent uses when positioning an Annals of the American Association of Geographers manuscript in the literature — engaging geographic scholarship across the relevant area and the…
Aaag Rebuttal
brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills
A skill your agent uses when responding to an Annals of the American Association of Geographers decision letter (major/minor revision) — building a point-by-point response to the subject editor and…
Aaag Research Design
brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills
A skill your agent uses when defending the research design of an Annals of the American Association of Geographers manuscript — spatial/quantitative analysis and GIScience, remote-sensing and…
Aaag Review Process
brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills
A skill your agent uses when you need to understand how the Annals of the American Association of Geographers evaluates a manuscript — double-anonymous review routed through a subject editor by…
Aaag Submission
brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills
A skill your agent uses when running the final pre-submission preflight for the Annals of the American Association of Geographers via ScholarOne Manuscripts — area/article-type selection…
Related
Categories
Questions about Icsme Review Process
What does Icsme Review Process do?
A skill your agent uses when reasoning about how an IEEE ICSME research submission is evaluated, covering double-anonymous review, the early-decision cut that issues Accept/Reject before the…. Icsme Review Process is an agent skill from brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills. Use when reasoning about how an IEEE ICSME research submission is evaluated, covering double-anonymous review, the early-decision cut that issues Accept/Reject before the rebuttal, the "Response Recommended" author-response period, the single-round accept/reject model with no Major Revision, and how ICSME's process differs from FSE's journal-style round and ICSE's cycles.
When should I use Icsme Review Process?
Icsme Review Process fits situations like: reasoning about how an IEEE ICSME research submission is evaluated; covering double-anonymous review; the early-decision cut that issues Accept/Reject before the rebuttal; the Response Recommended author-response period.
How do I install Icsme Review Process in Claude Code?
Run `npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill icsme-review-process -a claude-code`. Or copy the skill folder (ICSME-Skills/skills/icsme-review-process in brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills) into .claude/skills/icsme-review-process in your project. Claude Code loads it when a task matches its description.
How do I install Icsme Review Process in Codex?
Run `npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill icsme-review-process -a codex`. Or copy the skill folder (ICSME-Skills/skills/icsme-review-process in brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills) into .agents/skills/icsme-review-process in your project. Codex loads it when a task matches its description.
Can I use Icsme Review Process in Cursor, Gemini CLI or GitHub Copilot?
Cursor, Gemini CLI, GitHub Copilot and OpenCode also load SKILL.md folders. With the skills CLI, run `npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill icsme-review-process -a cursor` (or -a gemini-cli, github-copilot or opencode for the others). To copy it by hand, put the folder in .cursor/skills/icsme-review-process, .gemini/skills/icsme-review-process, .github/skills/icsme-review-process and .opencode/skills/icsme-review-process in your project.
What does Icsme Review Process need to run?
SKILL.md names no scripts, command-line tools or credentials: Icsme Review Process is instructions for the agent only.
Does Icsme Review Process access the network?
SKILL.md contains no URLs. Any network use would come from the scripts or tools the agent runs. This is read from the text; nothing was executed.
Is Icsme Review Process safe to install?
Our automated static check of SKILL.md found no risky patterns, such as piping downloads into a shell, reading credential files or hidden Unicode. It is not a guarantee. Review the folder before installing.
What licence does Icsme Review Process use?
Icsme Review Process is published under the MIT licence (the repository's licence). It allows redistribution, so the full SKILL.md is shown on this page.
How many tokens does Icsme Review Process use?
About 1.5k tokens (SKILL.md is roughly 6.1k characters). Agents keep only the skill's name and description in context until a task matches; then they load SKILL.md in full.
What are the alternatives to Icsme Review Process?
Skills that share tags, products or a category with Icsme Review Process: Hypothesis Generation (spacering-net/codeg, 3.9k stars), GitHub Deep Research (bytedance/deer-flow, 84k stars), Nature Paper Card (Yuan1z0825/nature-skills, 47k stars) and Content Research Writer (weapp-tailwindcss/weapp-tailwindcss, 1.9k stars). The comparison table on this page puts their stars, adoption, token cost, safety result and licence side by side.
Who maintains Icsme Review Process?
brycewang-stanford (a GitHub user) maintains it in brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills, which has 1,231 GitHub stars. The repository holds 2,387 skills in this directory. The repository was last updated on September 27, 2026.
Source: brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills on GitHub. Facts on this page come from the repository at the commit we read; the author's words are quoted as theirs.