Question2report
refraction-ray/xalpha
Turn a natural-language financial question into a polished, self-contained HTML report.
A skill your agent uses when reasoning about how an ACM SoCC submission is evaluated, covering dual-anonymous review, the two-round-per-year model with the no-cross-round-resubmission rule, the…
Install Socc Review Process
$ npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill socc-review-process -a claude-codeProject install by default; add -g for ~/.claude/skills/.
$ gh skill install brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills socc-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/SoCC-Skills/skills/socc-review-process .claude/skills/socc-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 "socc-review-process" agent skill from https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills/tree/main/SoCC-Skills/skills/socc-review-process into .claude/skills/socc-review-process/ in this project. Copy the whole folder (SKILL.md and every file beside it), keep the folder name "socc-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/SoCC-Skills/skills/socc-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 socc-review-process -a codexProject install goes to .agents/skills/; add -g for ~/.codex/skills/.
$ gh skill install brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills socc-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/SoCC-Skills/skills/socc-review-process .agents/skills/socc-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 "socc-review-process" agent skill from https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills/tree/main/SoCC-Skills/skills/socc-review-process into .agents/skills/socc-review-process/ in this project. Copy the whole folder (SKILL.md and every file beside it), keep the folder name "socc-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 socc-review-process -a cursorProject install goes to .agents/skills/; add -g for ~/.cursor/skills/.
$ gh skill install brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills socc-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/SoCC-Skills/skills/socc-review-process .cursor/skills/socc-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 "socc-review-process" agent skill from https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills/tree/main/SoCC-Skills/skills/socc-review-process into .cursor/skills/socc-review-process/ in this project. Copy the whole folder (SKILL.md and every file beside it), keep the folder name "socc-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 SoCC-Skills/skills/socc-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 socc-review-process -a gemini-cliProject install goes to .agents/skills/; add -g for ~/.gemini/skills/.
$ gh skill install brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills socc-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/SoCC-Skills/skills/socc-review-process .gemini/skills/socc-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 "socc-review-process" agent skill from https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills/tree/main/SoCC-Skills/skills/socc-review-process into .gemini/skills/socc-review-process/ in this project. Copy the whole folder (SKILL.md and every file beside it), keep the folder name "socc-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 socc-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 socc-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/SoCC-Skills/skills/socc-review-process .github/skills/socc-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 "socc-review-process" agent skill from https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills/tree/main/SoCC-Skills/skills/socc-review-process into .github/skills/socc-review-process/ in this project. Copy the whole folder (SKILL.md and every file beside it), keep the folder name "socc-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 socc-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 socc-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/SoCC-Skills/skills/socc-review-process .opencode/skills/socc-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 "socc-review-process" agent skill from https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills/tree/main/SoCC-Skills/skills/socc-review-process into .opencode/skills/socc-review-process/ in this project. Copy the whole folder (SKILL.md and every file beside it), keep the folder name "socc-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
socc-review-process- GitHub stars
- 1.2k
- Token cost
- ~1.6k tokens
- SKILL.md length
- 743 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 SoCC submission is evaluated, covering dual-anonymous review, the two-round-per-year model with the no-cross-round-resubmission rule, the…
- Reasoning about how an ACM SoCC submission is evaluated
- SKILL.md covers Process model, Reading a decision against the…, How SoCC differs from its… and Who reads you, plus 3 more sections
- Instructions only: no scripts, shell commands, URLs or credentials in SKILL.md
- Covering dual-anonymous review
What it does
Socc Review Process is an agent skill from brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills. Use when reasoning about how an ACM SoCC submission is evaluated, covering dual-anonymous review, the two-round-per-year model with the no-cross-round-resubmission rule, the author-response (rebuttal) period, the joint SIGMOD+SIGOPS reviewer pool that reads for both systems and data quality, and how SoCC's process differs from OSDI/NSDI/EuroSys.
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 Data & Analytics, covering Data cleaning. 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 SoCC submission is evaluated
- Covering dual-anonymous review
- The two-round-per-year model with the no-cross-round-resubmission rule
- The author-response (rebuttal) period
Example prompts
- “/socc-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
Socc Review Process loads about 1.6k tokens when it runs. Until then it costs about 92 tokens; SKILL.md has 743 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). 743 words, ~1,586 tokens.
Download SKILL.mdSave it as
.claude/skills/socc-review-process/SKILL.md (or your agent's skills folder).- name
- socc-review-process
- description
- Use when reasoning about how an ACM SoCC submission is evaluated, covering dual-anonymous review, the two-round-per-year model with the no-cross-round-resubmission rule, the author-response (rebuttal) period, the joint SIGMOD+SIGOPS reviewer pool that reads for both systems and data quality, and how SoCC's process differs from OSDI/NSDI/EuroSys.
SoCC Review Process
Model the pipeline before interpreting any single review. SoCC — the ACM Symposium on Cloud Computing — evaluates papers through a dual-anonymous, two-round process with a rebuttal, and its reviewer pool is drawn from both SIGMOD and SIGOPS. The most consequential mental shift for authors arriving from a pure systems or pure data venue is that your paper is judged on both axes at once: a systems reviewer probes the mechanism and the deployment, a data/measurement reviewer probes the workloads, traces, and statistical honesty — and a champion needs answers for both.
Process model
- Submission and review run on HotCRP with dual anonymity: reviewers do not see authors and authors do not see reviewers.
- SoCC runs two rounds per year, each a self-contained accept/reject cycle with its own abstract, submission, author-response window, and notification. A paper rejected in Round 1 cannot be resubmitted to Round 2 the same year.
- Each paper is read by multiple PC members spanning the systems-and-data pool, who weigh the significance of the cloud contribution, soundness of the design, quality of the measurement (throughput, latency, tail, and cost), realism of the deployment or trace, and reproducibility.
- Decisions are accept / reject per round (SoCC does not run a journal-style Major-Revision cycle); the rebuttal is the author's one written turn to move a borderline paper before the PC discussion.
- Accepted papers appear in the ACM DL SoCC proceedings and are presented at the symposium.
Reading a decision against the axes
| Signal in the reviews | What it means | Author move |
|---|---|---|
| Strong on novelty, weak on evaluation realism | A systems reviewer wants a testbed/deployment, not simulation | Rebut with real-system numbers or scope the claim |
| Strong on system, weak on measurement rigor | A data/measurement reviewer doubts the workloads or stats | Defend trace/workload choice; add tail and variance |
| "Cost/tail not reported" | The cloud outcome that decides adoption is missing | Point to where it lives or concede it as a gap |
| "Overlaps prior cloud/systems work" | Novelty/delta doubt | Sharpen the delta against the nearest SoCC/OSDI/NSDI work |
| Split systems vs. data reviewer | The two halves disagree | Give the champion of each half a direct, evidenced answer |
The strategic reading: a SoCC paper wins when it satisfies both sponsoring communities, so design the evaluation to answer a systems reviewer and a measurement reviewer, not one at the other's expense.
Show full SKILL.md (360 more words)Show less
How SoCC differs from its siblings
- vs. OSDI/SOSP: those flagships set a higher clean-slate systems-novelty bar and use the USENIX/ACM systems process; SoCC's identity is the cloud + data framing and its explicit welcome of measurement and experience papers. Never assume a shared template or calendar.
- vs. NSDI: NSDI centers the network; SoCC centers the cloud service and its data running on the infrastructure. A datacenter-fabric paper is NSDI-shaped; a storage-service or scheduler paper is SoCC-shaped.
- vs. EuroSys / ATC: both are broad systems venues; SoCC narrows to cloud and adds the SIGMOD half of the reviewer pool. A paper with a genuine data-management dimension is read more natively at SoCC than at a pure-systems venue.
- vs. a single-deadline venue: SoCC's two rounds give a second chance within the year — but
only to a different (or the same, next-year) paper, since a Round-1 reject cannot re-enter Round
Who reads you
Expect a mix of systems and data-management reviewers. They check whether the deployment or trace is real, whether tail latency and cost are reported (not just the mean), whether baselines are tuned, and whether the measurement pipeline is reproducible. Because SoCC spans storage, scheduling, serverless, big-data/ML infra, and cloud economics, a paper is usually matched to reviewers from its own subarea on both sides — a thin evaluation or a hand-waved workload gets caught, not skimmed.
Where author leverage actually exists
[Before submission] subject tags spanning systems AND data -> the right dual pool (largest lever)
[Rebuttal] factual corrections, a missing tail/cost number, a tuned-baseline result,
clarifying a misread workload -- the one written turn that moves borderlines
[Round choice] submit to the round you can make strong; a Round-1 reject forfeits Round 2
[After reject] no in-year resubmission; reroute to a sibling flagship or wait for next yearA rebuttal moves borderline papers when it corrects a factual misreading or supplies a number a reviewer said was missing (a p99 figure, a cost breakdown, a tuned baseline); it does not move papers when it argues taste. The PC discussion decides; the rebuttal is evidence for an advocate.
Misreadings to avoid
- Optimizing for one community — a systems-perfect paper with a weak workload story loses the data reviewer, and vice versa.
- Treating the rebuttal as a debate — it is bounded evidence for the PC discussion, not a closing argument.
- Reporting only averages — tail and cost are first-class at a cloud venue.
- Assuming Round 1 is a free trial — a reject there costs the SoCC year.
- Projecting last year's cadence — round count, dates, and rebuttal format are set per edition.
Output format
[Process stage] pre-submission / awaiting reviews / rebuttal / decided
[Round] round 1 / round 2, with the no-cross-round-resubmission rule noted
[Axis map] each review point -> systems (mechanism/deployment) | data (workload/measurement) | cost/tail | reproducibility
[Leverage plan] the rebuttal move that can actually change the outcome
[Forbidden moves] identity leak / unsupported new claims / Round-1 reject reused in Round 2© 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 SoCC-Skills/skills/socc-review-process of brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills.
Open the folder on GitHubat commit 932eb23
Compare with similar skills
Socc 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Socc Review Process this skillbrycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills | 1.2k | — | ~1.6k | Automated safety check: Pass | MIT | |
| Question2reportrefraction-ray/xalpha | 2.7k | — | ~3.2k | Automated safety check: Pass | MIT | |
| Dingo VerifyMigoXLab/dingo | 757 | — | ~741 | Automated safety check: Notes | Apache-2.0 | |
| Data Validationplatonai/Browser4 | 1.2k | — | ~896 | Automated safety check: Pass | Apache-2.0 | |
| Pandas ProJeffallan/claude-skills | 12k | 1 repos | ~1.5k | Automated safety check: Pass | MIT | |
| Issues DeduplicationJetBrains/ideavim | 10k | — | ~1.3k | Automated safety check: Pass | MIT |
Similar skills
Dingo Verify
MigoXLab/dingo
A skill your agent uses when the user wants to fact-check an article or verify factual claims in a document.
Data Validation
platonai/Browser4
Validates data against common and custom rules (required fields, formats, ranges).
Pandas Pro
Jeffallan/claude-skills
Handles pandas DataFrame work: cleaning, merging, groupby aggregation, pivots, time-series resampling and memory tuning, with checks on dtypes, shapes and nulls.
- Official
Issues Deduplication
JetBrains/ideavim
Handles deduplication of YouTrack issues. An agent skill from JetBrains/ideavim.
Openbb Data Fetcher
monarchjuno/vibe-investing
Fetch financial, market, economic, fundamental, news, options, crypto, ETF, index, and macro data through the OpenBB Python interface instead of the OpenBB MCP server.
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 Socc Review Process
What does Socc Review Process do?
A skill your agent uses when reasoning about how an ACM SoCC submission is evaluated, covering dual-anonymous review, the two-round-per-year model with the no-cross-round-resubmission rule, the…. Socc Review Process is an agent skill from brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills. Use when reasoning about how an ACM SoCC submission is evaluated, covering dual-anonymous review, the two-round-per-year model with the no-cross-round-resubmission rule, the author-response (rebuttal) period, the joint SIGMOD+SIGOPS reviewer pool that reads for both systems and data quality, and how SoCC's process differs from OSDI/NSDI/EuroSys.
When should I use Socc Review Process?
Socc Review Process fits situations like: reasoning about how an ACM SoCC submission is evaluated; covering dual-anonymous review; the two-round-per-year model with the no-cross-round-resubmission rule; the author-response (rebuttal) period.
How do I install Socc Review Process in Claude Code?
Run `npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill socc-review-process -a claude-code`. Or copy the skill folder (SoCC-Skills/skills/socc-review-process in brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills) into .claude/skills/socc-review-process in your project. Claude Code loads it when a task matches its description.
How do I install Socc Review Process in Codex?
Run `npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill socc-review-process -a codex`. Or copy the skill folder (SoCC-Skills/skills/socc-review-process in brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills) into .agents/skills/socc-review-process in your project. Codex loads it when a task matches its description.
Can I use Socc 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 socc-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/socc-review-process, .gemini/skills/socc-review-process, .github/skills/socc-review-process and .opencode/skills/socc-review-process in your project.
What does Socc Review Process need to run?
SKILL.md names no scripts, command-line tools or credentials: Socc Review Process is instructions for the agent only.
Does Socc 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 Socc 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 Socc Review Process use?
Socc 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 Socc Review Process use?
About 1.6k tokens (SKILL.md is roughly 6.3k 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 Socc Review Process?
Skills that share tags, products or a category with Socc Review Process: Question2report (refraction-ray/xalpha, 2.7k stars), Dingo Verify (MigoXLab/dingo, 757 stars), Data Validation (platonai/Browser4, 1.2k stars) and Pandas Pro (Jeffallan/claude-skills, 12k stars). The comparison table on this page puts their stars, adoption, token cost, safety result and licence side by side.
Who maintains Socc 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.