Deepseek Reason
ruvnet/ruflo
Reasoning-mode completion against DeepSeek's deepseek-reasoner model (R1) via /v1/chat/completions.
A skill your agent uses when reasoning about how a SODA (ACM-SIAM Symposium on Discrete Algorithms) submission is evaluated — the per-edition program committee under joint ACM-SIAM sponsorship…
MITAuto-check passed
Install Soda Review Process
$ npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill soda-review-process -a claude-codeProject install by default; add -g for ~/.claude/skills/.
$ gh skill install brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills soda-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/SODA-Skills/skills/soda-review-process .claude/skills/soda-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 "soda-review-process" agent skill from https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills/tree/main/SODA-Skills/skills/soda-review-process into .claude/skills/soda-review-process/ in this project. Copy the whole folder (SKILL.md and every file beside it), keep the folder name "soda-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/SODA-Skills/skills/soda-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 soda-review-process -a codexProject install goes to .agents/skills/; add -g for ~/.codex/skills/.
$ gh skill install brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills soda-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/SODA-Skills/skills/soda-review-process .agents/skills/soda-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 "soda-review-process" agent skill from https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills/tree/main/SODA-Skills/skills/soda-review-process into .agents/skills/soda-review-process/ in this project. Copy the whole folder (SKILL.md and every file beside it), keep the folder name "soda-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 soda-review-process -a cursorProject install goes to .agents/skills/; add -g for ~/.cursor/skills/.
$ gh skill install brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills soda-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/SODA-Skills/skills/soda-review-process .cursor/skills/soda-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 "soda-review-process" agent skill from https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills/tree/main/SODA-Skills/skills/soda-review-process into .cursor/skills/soda-review-process/ in this project. Copy the whole folder (SKILL.md and every file beside it), keep the folder name "soda-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 SODA-Skills/skills/soda-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 soda-review-process -a gemini-cliProject install goes to .agents/skills/; add -g for ~/.gemini/skills/.
$ gh skill install brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills soda-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/SODA-Skills/skills/soda-review-process .gemini/skills/soda-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 "soda-review-process" agent skill from https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills/tree/main/SODA-Skills/skills/soda-review-process into .gemini/skills/soda-review-process/ in this project. Copy the whole folder (SKILL.md and every file beside it), keep the folder name "soda-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 soda-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 soda-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/SODA-Skills/skills/soda-review-process .github/skills/soda-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 "soda-review-process" agent skill from https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills/tree/main/SODA-Skills/skills/soda-review-process into .github/skills/soda-review-process/ in this project. Copy the whole folder (SKILL.md and every file beside it), keep the folder name "soda-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 soda-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 soda-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/SODA-Skills/skills/soda-review-process .opencode/skills/soda-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 "soda-review-process" agent skill from https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills/tree/main/SODA-Skills/skills/soda-review-process into .opencode/skills/soda-review-process/ in this project. Copy the whole folder (SKILL.md and every file beside it), keep the folder name "soda-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
soda-review-process- GitHub stars
- 1.2k
- Token cost
- ~1.6k tokens
- SKILL.md length
- 747 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 a SODA (ACM-SIAM Symposium on Discrete Algorithms) submission is evaluated — the per-edition program committee under joint ACM-SIAM sponsorship…
- HotCRP triage of a record-size submission pool
- SKILL.md covers Pipeline anatomy, Who reads you: the subreviewer…, Lightweight double-blind,… and What moves a borderline paper, plus 4 more sections
- Instructions only: no scripts, shell commands, URLs or credentials in SKILL.md
- Lightweight double-blind refereeing of full versions
What it does
Soda Review Process is an agent skill from brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills. Use when reasoning about how a SODA (ACM-SIAM Symposium on Discrete Algorithms) submission is evaluated — the per-edition program committee under joint ACM-SIAM sponsorship, HotCRP triage of a record-size submission pool, lightweight double-blind refereeing of full versions, the September rebuttal, and October decisions.
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.
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
- HotCRP triage of a record-size submission pool
- Lightweight double-blind refereeing of full versions
- The September rebuttal
- October decisions
Example prompts
- “/soda-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
Soda Review Process loads about 1.6k tokens when it runs. Until then it costs about 86 tokens; SKILL.md has 747 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). 747 words, ~1,614 tokens.
Download SKILL.mdSave it as
.claude/skills/soda-review-process/SKILL.md (or your agent's skills folder).- name
- soda-review-process
- description
- Use when reasoning about how a SODA (ACM-SIAM Symposium on Discrete Algorithms) submission is evaluated — the per-edition program committee under joint ACM-SIAM sponsorship, HotCRP triage of a record-size submission pool, lightweight double-blind refereeing of full versions, the September rebuttal, and October decisions.
SODA Review Process
SODA is run jointly by the SIAM Activity Group on Discrete Mathematics and ACM SIGACT, with a fresh program committee appointed for each edition — there is no standing editorial board, and every policy below is re-decided annually. Anchor facts for the 2027 cycle (checked 2026-07-08 via SIAM SODA27 pages read through search renderings, plus organizer announcements): submission July 9, 2026 AoE on HotCRP; reviews to authors by September 1; responses due September 4; decisions and instructions in October 2026. The 2027 PC chairs were not yet indexed at check time: 待核实. For scale context, SODA 2026's chair reported the largest submission pool in SODA history, roughly a 25% jump year-over-year (reported via the PC chair's public announcement; treat as reported, not official).
Pipeline anatomy
| Phase (2027 anchors) | What happens | Author-side reality |
|---|---|---|
| July 9 | HotCRP closes | The record is frozen; nothing is added later |
| July | Bidding and assignment | Your title-page abstract and topic tags determine who reads you |
| July-August | Refereeing, often with external subreviewers | The full version is the reviewed object; depth checks are real |
| By September 1 | Initial reviews released | Read for factual errors first, opinions second |
| September 4 | Responses due | Three days; preparation happened in August (soda-author-response) |
| September-October | PC discussion and ranking | Reviews are debated; the response is evidence in that debate |
| October | Decisions + final instructions | Accept/reject; no shepherding tier by default (待核实 per cycle) |
Who reads you: the subreviewer economy
A large-pool theory conference distributes much of its reading to external subreviewers — domain experts recruited per paper by PC members. Consequences:
- Expect one deep technical review (the subreviewer who works in your niche) and
broader reviews weighing significance. Write for both: airtight proofs and a
first-ten-pages case for why the bound matters (
soda-writing-style). - Subreviewers check lineage. A comparison table that omits the actual state-of-the-art bound will be caught by the one person who proved it.
- Expertise variance is the norm, not a scandal. The rebuttal exists partly to arbitrate when the deep review and a skim review disagree.
Lightweight double-blind, referee's view
Referees see no author names, but SODA's rules keep the literature intact: authors post to arXiv freely and cite themselves in third person. In practice many referees can guess authorship; the process is designed to remove the default weight of names from triage, not to guarantee ignorance. Author-side consequences: never rely on reputation carrying a thin section, and never burn words hiding a self-citation the rules told you to keep visible.
Show full SKILL.md (339 more words)Show less
What moves a borderline paper
PC discussions compress each paper into a few sentences. The compressible virtues:
- A named open problem or barrier the result resolves or bypasses — with the citation where it was posed.
- A clean headline bound: "first deterministic near-linear time" survives compression; "improves several parameters in some regimes" does not.
- A transferable technique a PC member can imagine using elsewhere.
- A decisive rebuttal correction of the most negative review's factual core.
And the compressible sins: a bound worse than known work (fatal), a proof the
deep review could not verify (near-fatal), scope mismatch better served by a
satellite or sibling venue (soda-topic-selection).
Interpreting the calendar's silences
Author anxiety maps poorly onto PC reality; this table converts one to the other for the 2027 anchors:
| What you observe | What it usually means | What it does not mean |
|---|---|---|
| No confirmation beyond HotCRP receipt in July | Normal; assignment is in progress | Nothing about your paper's fate |
| Reviews arrive well before September 1 | A punctual referee pool | Neither enthusiasm nor doom |
| One review far shorter than the others | A triage-level read alongside deep ones | Not automatically negative — check its F/L content |
| A referee question phrased as a request for computation | Your rebuttal's highest-value target | Not an acceptance signal |
| Silence from September 5 to October | Deliberation; scores are being argued | No news is literally no news |
| Decision earlier or later within October | PC logistics | Nothing paper-specific |
The single decision authors control in this period is rebuttal quality; the single mistake available is contacting PC members outside HotCRP, which converts a borderline paper into a conflict-of-interest incident.
Reading a SODA review packet
For each review, classify every substantive sentence:
F factual claim about your paper -> verifiable; rebut if wrong
L literature claim (prior bound, who did what) -> check the citation yourself
S significance judgment -> rebuttal leverage is low
C correctness doubt -> highest priority; answer with page numbers
Then decide: does the packet's most negative review rest on F/L errors
(rebuttable) or on S consensus (usually terminal for this cycle)?After the decision
- Accept: October instructions start the camera-ready track
(
soda-camera-ready). - Reject with correctness doubts: repair the proof before any resubmission; theory reviewer pools overlap heavily across SODA, STOC, FOCS, ESA, and ICALP, and a resubmitted known bug follows the paper.
- Reject on significance: re-route rather than re-argue — ITCS for
conceptual framing, ESA/ICALP for strong-but-specialized algorithmics, SOSA if
the real contribution is a simplification (
soda-workflowhas the calendar).
Output format
[Process stage] <where the paper sits in the 2027 pipeline>
[Review triage] <F/L/S/C classification summary per review>
[Rebuttal leverage] <high/medium/low, with the deciding factor>
[Post-decision route] <camera-ready / repair / re-route target>© 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 SODA-Skills/skills/soda-review-process of brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills.
Open the folder on GitHubat commit 932eb23
Compare with similar skills
Soda 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Soda Review Process this skillbrycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills | 1.2k | — | ~1.6k | Automated safety check: Pass | MIT | |
| Deepseek Reasonruvnet/ruflo | 74k | — | ~626 | Automated safety check: Notes | MIT | |
| Ejentum Reasoning Harnesssickn33/agentic-awesome-skills | 47k | 1 repos | ~1.9k | Automated safety check: Pass | MIT | |
| Nowait Reasoning Optimizerdavila7/claude-code-templates | 33k | 2 repos | ~1.2k | Automated safety check: Pass | MIT | |
| Acm Symposium On Theory Of Computingfranklee16/academic-research-skills | 223 | 1 repos | ~1.9k | Automated safety check: Pass | None | |
| Acm Symposium On Operating Systems Principlesfranklee16/academic-research-skills | 223 | 1 repos | ~1.9k | Automated safety check: Pass | None |
Similar skills
Ejentum Reasoning Harness
sickn33/agentic-awesome-skills
MCP server exposing four cognitive harness modes (reasoning, code, anti-deception, memory).
Nowait Reasoning Optimizer
davila7/claude-code-templates
Implements the NOWAIT technique for efficient reasoning in R1-style LLMs.
Acm Symposium On Theory Of Computing
franklee16/academic-research-skills
A skill your agent uses when targeting ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing (STOC) or deciding whether a computer-science manuscript fits this venue.
Acm Symposium On Operating Systems Principles
franklee16/academic-research-skills
A skill your agent uses when targeting ACM Symposium on Operating Systems Principles (SOSP) or deciding whether a computer-science manuscript fits this venue.
Ieee Acm International Symposium On Microarchitecture
franklee16/academic-research-skills
A skill your agent uses when targeting IEEE/ACM International Symposium on Microarchitecture (MICRO) or deciding whether a computer-science manuscript fits this venue.
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…
Questions about Soda Review Process
What does Soda Review Process do?
A skill your agent uses when reasoning about how a SODA (ACM-SIAM Symposium on Discrete Algorithms) submission is evaluated — the per-edition program committee under joint ACM-SIAM sponsorship…. Soda Review Process is an agent skill from brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills. Use when reasoning about how a SODA (ACM-SIAM Symposium on Discrete Algorithms) submission is evaluated — the per-edition program committee under joint ACM-SIAM sponsorship, HotCRP triage of a record-size submission pool, lightweight double-blind refereeing of full versions, the September rebuttal, and October decisions.
When should I use Soda Review Process?
Soda Review Process fits situations like: hotCRP triage of a record-size submission pool; lightweight double-blind refereeing of full versions; the September rebuttal; october decisions.
How do I install Soda Review Process in Claude Code?
Run `npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill soda-review-process -a claude-code`. Or copy the skill folder (SODA-Skills/skills/soda-review-process in brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills) into .claude/skills/soda-review-process in your project. Claude Code loads it when a task matches its description.
How do I install Soda Review Process in Codex?
Run `npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill soda-review-process -a codex`. Or copy the skill folder (SODA-Skills/skills/soda-review-process in brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills) into .agents/skills/soda-review-process in your project. Codex loads it when a task matches its description.
Can I use Soda 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 soda-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/soda-review-process, .gemini/skills/soda-review-process, .github/skills/soda-review-process and .opencode/skills/soda-review-process in your project.
What does Soda Review Process need to run?
SKILL.md names no scripts, command-line tools or credentials: Soda Review Process is instructions for the agent only.
Does Soda 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 Soda 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 Soda Review Process use?
Soda 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 Soda Review Process use?
About 1.6k tokens (SKILL.md is roughly 6.5k 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 Soda Review Process?
Skills that share tags, products or a category with Soda Review Process: Deepseek Reason (ruvnet/ruflo, 74k stars), Ejentum Reasoning Harness (sickn33/agentic-awesome-skills, 47k stars), Nowait Reasoning Optimizer (davila7/claude-code-templates, 33k stars) and Acm Symposium On Theory Of Computing (franklee16/academic-research-skills, 223 stars). The comparison table on this page puts their stars, adoption, token cost, safety result and licence side by side.
Who maintains Soda 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.