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 ACM PODS submission is evaluated, covering lightweight double-anonymous review, the multi-cycle-per-year calendar, the two reviewing rounds within…
Install Pods Review Process
$ npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill pods-review-process -a claude-codeProject install by default; add -g for ~/.claude/skills/.
$ gh skill install brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills pods-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/PODS-Skills/skills/pods-review-process .claude/skills/pods-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 "pods-review-process" agent skill from https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills/tree/main/PODS-Skills/skills/pods-review-process into .claude/skills/pods-review-process/ in this project. Copy the whole folder (SKILL.md and every file beside it), keep the folder name "pods-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/PODS-Skills/skills/pods-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 pods-review-process -a codexProject install goes to .agents/skills/; add -g for ~/.codex/skills/.
$ gh skill install brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills pods-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/PODS-Skills/skills/pods-review-process .agents/skills/pods-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 "pods-review-process" agent skill from https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills/tree/main/PODS-Skills/skills/pods-review-process into .agents/skills/pods-review-process/ in this project. Copy the whole folder (SKILL.md and every file beside it), keep the folder name "pods-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 pods-review-process -a cursorProject install goes to .agents/skills/; add -g for ~/.cursor/skills/.
$ gh skill install brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills pods-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/PODS-Skills/skills/pods-review-process .cursor/skills/pods-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 "pods-review-process" agent skill from https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills/tree/main/PODS-Skills/skills/pods-review-process into .cursor/skills/pods-review-process/ in this project. Copy the whole folder (SKILL.md and every file beside it), keep the folder name "pods-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 PODS-Skills/skills/pods-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 pods-review-process -a gemini-cliProject install goes to .agents/skills/; add -g for ~/.gemini/skills/.
$ gh skill install brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills pods-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/PODS-Skills/skills/pods-review-process .gemini/skills/pods-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 "pods-review-process" agent skill from https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills/tree/main/PODS-Skills/skills/pods-review-process into .gemini/skills/pods-review-process/ in this project. Copy the whole folder (SKILL.md and every file beside it), keep the folder name "pods-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 pods-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 pods-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/PODS-Skills/skills/pods-review-process .github/skills/pods-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 "pods-review-process" agent skill from https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills/tree/main/PODS-Skills/skills/pods-review-process into .github/skills/pods-review-process/ in this project. Copy the whole folder (SKILL.md and every file beside it), keep the folder name "pods-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 pods-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 pods-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/PODS-Skills/skills/pods-review-process .opencode/skills/pods-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 "pods-review-process" agent skill from https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills/tree/main/PODS-Skills/skills/pods-review-process into .opencode/skills/pods-review-process/ in this project. Copy the whole folder (SKILL.md and every file beside it), keep the folder name "pods-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
pods-review-process- GitHub stars
- 1.2k
- Token cost
- ~1.6k tokens
- SKILL.md length
- 751 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 ACM PODS submission is evaluated, covering lightweight double-anonymous review, the multi-cycle-per-year calendar, the two reviewing rounds within…
- Reasoning about how an ACM PODS submission is evaluated
- SKILL.md covers Process model, Reading a decision against the…, How PODS differs from its… and Who reads you, plus 4 more sections
- Instructions only: no scripts, shell commands, URLs or credentials in SKILL.md
- Covering lightweight double-anonymous review
What it does
Pods Review Process is an agent skill from brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills. Use when reasoning about how an ACM PODS submission is evaluated, covering lightweight double-anonymous review, the multi-cycle-per-year calendar, the two reviewing rounds within a cycle, the 48-hour rebuttal, the accept/reject/revision decision with a shepherded revision, PACMMOD-track publication, and how PODS differs from SIGMOD's rounds and ICDT's process.
Its SKILL.md is about 1.6k 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 ACM PODS submission is evaluated
- Covering lightweight double-anonymous review
- The multi-cycle-per-year calendar
- The two reviewing rounds within a cycle
Example prompts
- “s rounds and ICDT”
- “/pods-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
Pods Review Process loads about 1.6k tokens when it runs. Until then it costs about 96 tokens; SKILL.md has 751 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). 751 words, ~1,593 tokens.
Download SKILL.mdSave it as
.claude/skills/pods-review-process/SKILL.md (or your agent's skills folder).- name
- pods-review-process
- description
- Use when reasoning about how an ACM PODS submission is evaluated, covering lightweight double-anonymous review, the multi-cycle-per-year calendar, the two reviewing rounds within a cycle, the 48-hour rebuttal, the accept/reject/revision decision with a shepherded revision, PACMMOD-track publication, and how PODS differs from SIGMOD's rounds and ICDT's process.
PODS Review Process
Model the pipeline before interpreting any single review. PODS review is done by database theoreticians who will read your proofs, and the process is multi-cycle with a revision round: a paper is not simply accepted or rejected on the first read — a revision decision (minor or major) with a shepherd is a first-class outcome. The most consequential mental shift for authors arriving from a plain accept/reject conference is that the revision is a real, shepherded second round inside the same cycle.
Process model
- Submission and review run on EasyChair with lightweight double-anonymity: author identities are hidden from reviewers, self-citations are third-person, and a conflict-of-interest list is declared at submission.
- Each cycle has two reviewing rounds to accommodate revisions. Reviewers assess the correctness and completeness of the proofs, the significance and novelty of the result, the precision of the model, and the tightness of the bounds.
- Authors get a short rebuttal window (about 48 hours, a few thousand characters) to correct factual misreadings before decisions.
- First decisions are accept / reject / revision. A revision (minor or major) invites a revised version within a set window; a shepherd judges whether the revision is satisfactory, and only then is the paper accepted.
- Accepted papers publish in the PACMMOD PODS track and are invited for presentation at the PODS symposium.
Reading a decision against the categories
| Decision | What it means | Author move |
|---|---|---|
| Accept | The result and proofs hold; at most cosmetic changes | Camera-ready + arXiv full version; do not reopen scope |
| Revision (minor) | A fixable gap: a clarified proof step, a stated assumption, a tightened bound | Implement precisely within the window; satisfy the shepherd |
| Revision (major) | A larger but plausibly closeable gap: a missing case, an unproven direction | Treat as a real second round; complete it or the shepherd declines |
| Reject | Structural: a wrong proof, an un-closable gap, or out-of-scope for a theory venue | Fix fully and route to a later cycle/ICDT/journal — no immediate resubmission |
The strategic reading: design the submission so its weakest point is repairable in a revision (a proof step to clarify, an assumption to state, a case to add) rather than structural (a main theorem that is false or unproven). The revision round rewards papers whose gaps are closeable.
How PODS differs from its siblings
- vs. SIGMOD/VLDB/ICDE: those systems flagships judge measured performance; PODS judges proofs. Even co-located with SIGMOD, PODS shares neither the acceptance bar nor the evidence type — a benchmark cannot rescue a missing proof here.
- vs. ICDT: ICDT is PODS's sister theory venue in the EDBT/ICDT federation with an overlapping community; the reviewing cultures are close, but the calendars and proceedings differ. Do not assume a shared deadline or template.
- vs. a once-a-year venue: PODS's multiple cycles mean a reject is only a season from another chance — but the resubmission embargo (roughly a year for rejected work) means a premature submission can still cost more than one cycle.
Show full SKILL.md (269 more words)Show less
Who reads you
Expect theory reviewers who check the mathematics. They will read the key proofs, look in the appendix for the deferred ones, and catch a circular lemma, an unjustified "it is easy to see," or a lower bound that does not match the claimed upper bound. Because PODS spans logic, complexity, and algorithms, a paper is matched to reviewers in its subarea — a hand-waved proof is caught, not skimmed.
Where author leverage actually exists
[Before submission] topic tags + a precise abstract -> reviewer match (large lever)
[Rebuttal] correct factual misreadings and pointer errors in ~48 hours; not a place for new proofs
[Revision] the strongest lever: close the identified gap, satisfy the shepherd, resubmit in the window
[After reject] no appeal; fix fully, then a later cycle / ICDT / journal (mind the resubmission embargo)The rebuttal moves a paper when it shows a reviewer misread a definition or missed an existing appendix proof; it does not move a paper by arguing taste or promising a proof you have not written. In a revision, an unaddressed required item is what turns the shepherded round into a reject.
Reading a review packet
Weight reviews before answering. A review that engages your theorem statements and points to a specific proof step read the paper closely and will re-check the revision — that reviewer or the shepherd is your path to acceptance if the fix holds. A review that only discusses significance has left correctness to the others; answer each reviewer on the axis they raised (correctness, tightness, novelty, modeling).
Misreadings to avoid
- Treating a revision as a guaranteed accept — the shepherd's second read is real; complete the required items, do not do half.
- Using the rebuttal to add new proofs — reviewers cannot verify unwritten mathematics in 48 hours; reserve substantive fixes for the revision.
- Assuming co-location with SIGMOD means a systems-friendly bar — PODS judges proofs, full stop.
- Projecting last cycle's calendar — cycle count and dates are decided per edition.
Output format
[Process stage] pre-submission / awaiting reviews / rebuttal / revision / final / accepted
[Decision category] accept / revision (minor|major) / reject, with the criterion driving it
[Criterion map] each review point -> correctness | tightness | significance | modeling | clarity
[Leverage plan] the next-stage action that can actually change the outcome (rebuttal fix / revision item)
[Forbidden moves] identity leak / new unverifiable proof in the rebuttal / ignoring a required revision item© 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 PODS-Skills/skills/pods-review-process of brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills.
Open the folder on GitHubat commit 932eb23
Compare with similar skills
Pods 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Pods Review Process this skillbrycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills | 1.2k | — | ~1.6k | 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 Pods Review Process
What does Pods Review Process do?
A skill your agent uses when reasoning about how an ACM PODS submission is evaluated, covering lightweight double-anonymous review, the multi-cycle-per-year calendar, the two reviewing rounds within…. Pods Review Process is an agent skill from brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills. Use when reasoning about how an ACM PODS submission is evaluated, covering lightweight double-anonymous review, the multi-cycle-per-year calendar, the two reviewing rounds within a cycle, the 48-hour rebuttal, the accept/reject/revision decision with a shepherded revision, PACMMOD-track publication, and how PODS differs from SIGMOD's rounds and ICDT's process.
When should I use Pods Review Process?
Pods Review Process fits situations like: reasoning about how an ACM PODS submission is evaluated; covering lightweight double-anonymous review; the multi-cycle-per-year calendar; the two reviewing rounds within a cycle.
How do I install Pods Review Process in Claude Code?
Run `npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill pods-review-process -a claude-code`. Or copy the skill folder (PODS-Skills/skills/pods-review-process in brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills) into .claude/skills/pods-review-process in your project. Claude Code loads it when a task matches its description.
How do I install Pods Review Process in Codex?
Run `npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill pods-review-process -a codex`. Or copy the skill folder (PODS-Skills/skills/pods-review-process in brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills) into .agents/skills/pods-review-process in your project. Codex loads it when a task matches its description.
Can I use Pods 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 pods-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/pods-review-process, .gemini/skills/pods-review-process, .github/skills/pods-review-process and .opencode/skills/pods-review-process in your project.
What does Pods Review Process need to run?
SKILL.md names no scripts, command-line tools or credentials: Pods Review Process is instructions for the agent only.
Does Pods 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 Pods 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 Pods Review Process use?
Pods 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 Pods Review Process use?
About 1.6k tokens (SKILL.md is roughly 6.4k 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 Pods Review Process?
Skills that share tags, products or a category with Pods 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 Pods 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.