Hypothesis Generation
spacering-net/codeg
Structured hypothesis formulation from observations. An agent skill from spacering-net/codeg.
A skill your agent uses to model the ITCS reviewing pipeline — a program committee plus external reviewers, conceptual-novelty weighting, lightweight double-blind, no author-response/rebuttal phase…
Install Itcs Review Process
$ npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill itcs-review-process -a claude-codeProject install by default; add -g for ~/.claude/skills/.
$ gh skill install brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills itcs-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/ITCS-Skills/skills/itcs-review-process .claude/skills/itcs-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 "itcs-review-process" agent skill from https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills/tree/main/ITCS-Skills/skills/itcs-review-process into .claude/skills/itcs-review-process/ in this project. Copy the whole folder (SKILL.md and every file beside it), keep the folder name "itcs-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/ITCS-Skills/skills/itcs-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 itcs-review-process -a codexProject install goes to .agents/skills/; add -g for ~/.codex/skills/.
$ gh skill install brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills itcs-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/ITCS-Skills/skills/itcs-review-process .agents/skills/itcs-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 "itcs-review-process" agent skill from https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills/tree/main/ITCS-Skills/skills/itcs-review-process into .agents/skills/itcs-review-process/ in this project. Copy the whole folder (SKILL.md and every file beside it), keep the folder name "itcs-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 itcs-review-process -a cursorProject install goes to .agents/skills/; add -g for ~/.cursor/skills/.
$ gh skill install brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills itcs-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/ITCS-Skills/skills/itcs-review-process .cursor/skills/itcs-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 "itcs-review-process" agent skill from https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills/tree/main/ITCS-Skills/skills/itcs-review-process into .cursor/skills/itcs-review-process/ in this project. Copy the whole folder (SKILL.md and every file beside it), keep the folder name "itcs-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 ITCS-Skills/skills/itcs-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 itcs-review-process -a gemini-cliProject install goes to .agents/skills/; add -g for ~/.gemini/skills/.
$ gh skill install brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills itcs-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/ITCS-Skills/skills/itcs-review-process .gemini/skills/itcs-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 "itcs-review-process" agent skill from https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills/tree/main/ITCS-Skills/skills/itcs-review-process into .gemini/skills/itcs-review-process/ in this project. Copy the whole folder (SKILL.md and every file beside it), keep the folder name "itcs-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 itcs-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 itcs-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/ITCS-Skills/skills/itcs-review-process .github/skills/itcs-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 "itcs-review-process" agent skill from https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills/tree/main/ITCS-Skills/skills/itcs-review-process into .github/skills/itcs-review-process/ in this project. Copy the whole folder (SKILL.md and every file beside it), keep the folder name "itcs-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 itcs-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 itcs-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/ITCS-Skills/skills/itcs-review-process .opencode/skills/itcs-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 "itcs-review-process" agent skill from https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills/tree/main/ITCS-Skills/skills/itcs-review-process into .opencode/skills/itcs-review-process/ in this project. Copy the whole folder (SKILL.md and every file beside it), keep the folder name "itcs-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
itcs-review-process- GitHub stars
- 1.2k
- Token cost
- ~1.4k tokens
- SKILL.md length
- 636 words
- Files
- 1
- Skills in repo
- 2,387
- Repo updated
- First seen
- Licence
- MIT
At a glance
A skill your agent uses to model the ITCS reviewing pipeline — a program committee plus external reviewers, conceptual-novelty weighting, lightweight double-blind, no author-response/rebuttal phase…
- Works in 5 steps: Registration then submission.… → PC + external review. A program… → Reviewing on the novelty axis. Reviewers… → …
- Model the ITCS reviewing pipeline — a program committee plus external reviewers
- SKILL.md covers The pipeline, Lightweight double-blind,…, The no-rebuttal reality and Where the (limited) leverage is, plus 3 more sections
- Instructions only: no scripts, shell commands, URLs or credentials in SKILL.md
What it does
Itcs Review Process is an agent skill from brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills. Use to model the ITCS reviewing pipeline — a program committee plus external reviewers, conceptual-novelty weighting, lightweight double-blind, no author-response/rebuttal phase, and a single accept/reject decision — and to understand where the (limited) author leverage actually is.
Its SKILL.md is about 1.4k 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
- Model the ITCS reviewing pipeline — a program committee plus external reviewers
- Conceptual-novelty weighting
- Lightweight double-blind
- No author-response/rebuttal phase
Example prompts
- “/itcs-review-process”
Workflow steps
5 steps, taken from the first numbered list in SKILL.md.
- Registration then submission. Title/abstract/authors/conflicts lock ~2 days before the
- PC + external review. A program committee (order of a few dozen members) handles the load;
- Reviewing on the novelty axis. Reviewers are briefed to weight conceptual contribution
- PC decision. The committee reaches accept/reject. There is no Major Revision
- Notification (~November), then camera-ready for LIPIcs.
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
Itcs Review Process loads about 1.4k tokens when it runs. Until then it costs about 76 tokens; SKILL.md has 636 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). 636 words, ~1,387 tokens.
Download SKILL.mdSave it as
.claude/skills/itcs-review-process/SKILL.md (or your agent's skills folder).- name
- itcs-review-process
- description
- Use to model the ITCS reviewing pipeline — a program committee plus external reviewers, conceptual-novelty weighting, lightweight double-blind, no author-response/rebuttal phase, and a single accept/reject decision — and to understand where the (limited) author leverage actually is.
ITCS Review Process
Understanding how ITCS decides tells you where your effort matters — and at ITCS, almost all of it matters before the deadline, because there is no rebuttal, no revise-and-resubmit, and no second round. The submission is judged as it stands. This skill models the pipeline so you can calibrate expectations and pre-empt the objections you will never get to answer.
The pipeline
- Registration then submission. Title/abstract/authors/conflicts lock ~2 days before the paper (early September); the abstract drives PC bidding. Then the anonymized full PDF with complete proofs is uploaded to HotCRP.
- PC + external review. A program committee (order of a few dozen members) handles the load; PC members review directly or solicit external reviewers (subreferees) for expertise. The PC — not the external reviewers — owns the decisions.
- Reviewing on the novelty axis. Reviewers are briefed to weight conceptual contribution
— a new model, question, or connection — over incremental technical depth. "Is this a new
question worth asking, and is the model alive?" carries more weight than "is this the year's
hardest theorem?" (contrast STOC/FOCS; see
itcs-topic-selection). - PC decision. The committee reaches accept/reject. There is no Major Revision category and no author-response phase — the reviews are formed and the decision made without your input.
- Notification (~November), then camera-ready for LIPIcs.
Lightweight double-blind, precisely
- The submitted PDF omits author names, affiliations, and emails; the prose avoids identity-revealing self-reference.
- But it is lightweight: the reference list is not anonymized, and authors are encouraged to post a non-anonymous full version to arXiv/ECCC/ePrint. Reviewers are not forbidden from encountering the preprint. The blinding reduces first-impression bias; it does not attempt airtight anonymity.
- Some editions have handled this as a "reveal after initial review" middle ground; treat the
exact mechanism as cycle-volatile and read the current call (see
../../resources/official-source-map.md).
The no-rebuttal reality
This is the single biggest difference from many CS venues, and it reshapes strategy:
- You cannot correct a misunderstanding after the fact. If a reviewer misreads your model or doubts your novelty, the paper must have forestalled it in the text.
- The submission is the whole argument. Everything a depth venue's authors would save for a rebuttal — the "is it trivial?" defense, the novelty delta, the scope caveats — must be present at upload.
- See
itcs-author-responsefor how to operate when there is no response phase, and how the pre-emption work happens inside the paper.
Show full SKILL.md (241 more words)Show less
Where the (limited) leverage is
| Stage | Leverage | How to use it |
|---|---|---|
| Before submission | High | Pre-empt the three objections (trivial? new? why-care?) in the paper; prove the anchoring result in full |
| Abstract/registration | Medium | A precise, honest abstract improves PC bidding and reviewer match |
| Preprint | Low-medium | A clear full version helps a reviewer who wants more detail (allowed under lightweight double-blind) |
| After reviews arrive | ~None | No rebuttal; reviews are usually returned with the decision |
| After reject | Medium (next venue) | Reviews are typically substantive; use them to sharpen a STOC/FOCS/SODA or journal resubmission |
What reviewers are looking for (calibrate to these)
- A genuinely new idea, checkably new against the ITCS/ICS back-catalog and the connected area.
- A model that is alive — an anchoring separation/possibility/impossibility result.
- Complete, correct proofs of every central claim (the appendix counts; the external preprint does not, on its own).
- Honest scope — a bold first foray with candid open problems is a feature here, not a weakness.
- A reason the community should care — a connection, a reframing, an application sketch.
Common misreadings to avoid
- Treating ITCS like STOC and optimizing for depth — the PC may find the paper strong but "not innovative enough."
- Assuming a rebuttal will let you fix a gap — there is none; the gap sinks the paper.
- Assuming the external full version will be read — the PC judges the submitted PDF.
- Anonymizing references or self-citations — that breaks the lightweight rule and can read as
evasive (see
itcs-related-work).
Output format
[ITCS review calibration]
[Novelty] is the new idea legible and checkably new to a briefed PC? yes/no
[Alive] anchoring result present? yes/no
[Proofs] all central claims fully proved IN the submitted PDF? yes/no
[Objections pre-empted] trivial? / new? / why-care? all answered in-text (no rebuttal to rely on)? yes/no
[Anonymity] names/affil/email removed, references NOT anonymized? yes/no
[Risk read] likely reviewer objection + where the paper already answers it (or must)© 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 ITCS-Skills/skills/itcs-review-process of brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills.
Open the folder on GitHubat commit 932eb23
Compare with similar skills
Itcs 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Itcs Review Process this skillbrycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills | 1.2k | — | ~1.4k | 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 | |
| Peer Reviewspacering-net/codeg | 3.9k | 17 repos | ~5.9k | 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.
Peer Review
spacering-net/codeg
Structured manuscript/grant review with checklist-based evaluation.
Last30days
mvanhorn/last30days-skill
Research what people actually say about any topic in the last 30 days.
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 Itcs Review Process
What does Itcs Review Process do?
A skill your agent uses to model the ITCS reviewing pipeline — a program committee plus external reviewers, conceptual-novelty weighting, lightweight double-blind, no author-response/rebuttal phase…. Itcs Review Process is an agent skill from brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills. Use to model the ITCS reviewing pipeline — a program committee plus external reviewers, conceptual-novelty weighting, lightweight double-blind, no author-response/rebuttal phase, and a single accept/reject decision — and to understand where the (limited) author leverage actually is.
When should I use Itcs Review Process?
Itcs Review Process fits situations like: model the ITCS reviewing pipeline — a program committee plus external reviewers; conceptual-novelty weighting; lightweight double-blind; no author-response/rebuttal phase.
How do I install Itcs Review Process in Claude Code?
Run `npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill itcs-review-process -a claude-code`. Or copy the skill folder (ITCS-Skills/skills/itcs-review-process in brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills) into .claude/skills/itcs-review-process in your project. Claude Code loads it when a task matches its description.
How do I install Itcs Review Process in Codex?
Run `npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill itcs-review-process -a codex`. Or copy the skill folder (ITCS-Skills/skills/itcs-review-process in brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills) into .agents/skills/itcs-review-process in your project. Codex loads it when a task matches its description.
Can I use Itcs 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 itcs-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/itcs-review-process, .gemini/skills/itcs-review-process, .github/skills/itcs-review-process and .opencode/skills/itcs-review-process in your project.
What does Itcs Review Process need to run?
SKILL.md names no scripts, command-line tools or credentials: Itcs Review Process is instructions for the agent only.
Does Itcs 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 Itcs 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 Itcs Review Process use?
Itcs 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 Itcs Review Process use?
About 1.4k tokens (SKILL.md is roughly 5.5k 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 Itcs Review Process?
Skills that share tags, products or a category with Itcs 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 Itcs Review Process?
brycewang-stanford (a GitHub user) maintains it in brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills, which has 1,228 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.