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.
A skill your agent uses when reasoning about how a STOC (ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing) submission is evaluated — the SIGACT program-committee model with external subreviewers, HotCRP…
MITAuto-check passed
Install Stoc Review Process
$ npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill stoc-review-process -a claude-codeProject install by default; add -g for ~/.claude/skills/.
$ gh skill install brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills stoc-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/STOC-Skills/skills/stoc-review-process .claude/skills/stoc-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 "stoc-review-process" agent skill from https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills/tree/main/STOC-Skills/skills/stoc-review-process into .claude/skills/stoc-review-process/ in this project. Copy the whole folder (SKILL.md and every file beside it), keep the folder name "stoc-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/STOC-Skills/skills/stoc-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 stoc-review-process -a codexProject install goes to .agents/skills/; add -g for ~/.codex/skills/.
$ gh skill install brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills stoc-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/STOC-Skills/skills/stoc-review-process .agents/skills/stoc-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 "stoc-review-process" agent skill from https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills/tree/main/STOC-Skills/skills/stoc-review-process into .agents/skills/stoc-review-process/ in this project. Copy the whole folder (SKILL.md and every file beside it), keep the folder name "stoc-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 stoc-review-process -a cursorProject install goes to .agents/skills/; add -g for ~/.cursor/skills/.
$ gh skill install brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills stoc-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/STOC-Skills/skills/stoc-review-process .cursor/skills/stoc-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 "stoc-review-process" agent skill from https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills/tree/main/STOC-Skills/skills/stoc-review-process into .cursor/skills/stoc-review-process/ in this project. Copy the whole folder (SKILL.md and every file beside it), keep the folder name "stoc-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 STOC-Skills/skills/stoc-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 stoc-review-process -a gemini-cliProject install goes to .agents/skills/; add -g for ~/.gemini/skills/.
$ gh skill install brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills stoc-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/STOC-Skills/skills/stoc-review-process .gemini/skills/stoc-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 "stoc-review-process" agent skill from https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills/tree/main/STOC-Skills/skills/stoc-review-process into .gemini/skills/stoc-review-process/ in this project. Copy the whole folder (SKILL.md and every file beside it), keep the folder name "stoc-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 stoc-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 stoc-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/STOC-Skills/skills/stoc-review-process .github/skills/stoc-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 "stoc-review-process" agent skill from https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills/tree/main/STOC-Skills/skills/stoc-review-process into .github/skills/stoc-review-process/ in this project. Copy the whole folder (SKILL.md and every file beside it), keep the folder name "stoc-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 stoc-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 stoc-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/STOC-Skills/skills/stoc-review-process .opencode/skills/stoc-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 "stoc-review-process" agent skill from https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills/tree/main/STOC-Skills/skills/stoc-review-process into .opencode/skills/stoc-review-process/ in this project. Copy the whole folder (SKILL.md and every file beside it), keep the folder name "stoc-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
stoc-review-process- GitHub stars
- 1.2k
- Token cost
- ~1.7k tokens
- SKILL.md length
- 788 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 STOC (ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing) submission is evaluated — the SIGACT program-committee model with external subreviewers, HotCRP…
- HotCRP mechanics
- SKILL.md covers Who actually reads the paper, What the committee optimizes, Timeline anatomy (2026 cycle) and Double-blind mechanics, HotCRP…, plus 4 more sections
- Instructions only: no scripts, shell commands, URLs or credentials in SKILL.md
- Double-blind conflicts
What it does
Stoc Review Process is an agent skill from brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills. Use when reasoning about how a STOC (ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing) submission is evaluated — the SIGACT program-committee model with external subreviewers, HotCRP mechanics, double-blind conflicts, the November-to-February decision arc, and what best-paper designation and rejection each actually mean.
Its SKILL.md is about 1.7k 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 mechanics
- Double-blind conflicts
- The November-to-February decision arc
- What best-paper designation and rejection each actually mean
Example prompts
- “/stoc-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
Stoc Review Process loads about 1.7k tokens when it runs. Until then it costs about 83 tokens; SKILL.md has 788 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). 788 words, ~1,682 tokens.
Download SKILL.mdSave it as
.claude/skills/stoc-review-process/SKILL.md (or your agent's skills folder).- name
- stoc-review-process
- description
- Use when reasoning about how a STOC (ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing) submission is evaluated — the SIGACT program-committee model with external subreviewers, HotCRP mechanics, double-blind conflicts, the November-to-February decision arc, and what best-paper designation and rejection each actually mean.
STOC Review Process
Model for the anchor cycle: STOC 2026 submissions went to HotCRP
(stoc26.hotcrp.com) by November 4, 2025, and decisions were emailed on or
before February 1, 2026 — a roughly thirteen-week arc with no author-visible
intermediate stage announced in the CFP (checked 2026-07-08). The PC chair was
Artur Czumaj (University of Warwick); chairs and committees are reconstituted
every year by SIGACT, so treat all names as one-cycle facts.
Who actually reads the paper
STOC uses the classical theory model, not the ML area-chair pyramid:
- A single program committee of several dozen theoreticians covers the whole field; each paper is assigned to a handful of PC members.
- PC members widely delegate detailed proof-reading to external subreviewers — often the postdoc or specialist closest to the sub-area. In practice the most technically engaged report on your paper is frequently written by someone not on the PC at all.
- The PC member then argues the paper's case (or its dismissal) in HotCRP discussion and, for contested papers, at the (physical or virtual) PC meeting. Papers near the boundary live or die on whether one PC member is willing to champion them against the accept-rate arithmetic.
Consequences for authors: write the overview for the cross-area PC member, the proofs for the specialist subreviewer, and the first page for the five-minute skim that decides how much attention the rest receives.
What the committee optimizes
STOC self-defines as the SIGACT flagship for the theory of computation, and its committee heuristics follow:
| Evaluation axis | The question in the PC discussion |
|---|---|
| Correctness | Has anyone verified the central argument? Any unresolved doubts sink the paper |
| Significance | Does this change what the field knows — barrier broken, problem closed, model clarified? |
| Breadth of interest | Can a non-specialist on the PC see why it matters? (STOC's distinguishing axis vs. specialized venues) |
| Novelty of technique | Will the machinery be reused by others? |
| Presentation | Could the committee actually follow the guaranteed-read pages? |
Note what is absent: no experiments axis, no artifact axis, no checklist score.
And note the STOC-specific weight on breadth — a technically flawless result
whose interest is confined to one subcommunity is precisely the paper that gets
"strong work, better suited to <specialized venue>" at STOC.
Timeline anatomy (2026 cycle)
Nov 1, 2025 opt-in LLM pre-submission feedback upload (experiment; authors-only output)
Nov 4, 2025 submission deadline, 4:59pm EST (not AoE)
Nov-Jan assignment -> subreviews -> PC discussion on HotCRP
possible chair-mediated author queries (custom, not guaranteed)
<= Feb 1, 2026 accept/reject notification by email
Mar 31, 2026 camera-ready (AoE) + full version public on arXiv/ECCC
Jun 22-26, 2026 conference (Salt Lake City; TheoryFest program)No rebuttal round existed in this arc; stoc-author-response covers what to do
instead. Reviews are typically released with the decision, at varying levels of
detail.
Double-blind mechanics, HotCRP flavor
- STOC 2026 was double-blind: reviewers were not shown author identities, and submissions had to avoid revealing them. Conflicts are declared on HotCRP by authors against PC members; incomplete conflict declaration is an integrity issue, not an oversight.
- Subreviewer anonymity runs the other way too — you will likely never learn who verified your proofs. Do not fish for reviewer identity on social media or at the conference; theory is a small community and this is remembered.
Show full SKILL.md (316 more words)Show less
Where author leverage exists (and doesn't)
Because the process has no author-visible stages between upload and decision, all leverage is front-loaded:
- Bid-stage leverage: the HotCRP-form abstract and topic selections decide which PC members bid; a mis-scoped abstract routes the paper to reviewers who will judge it by the wrong sub-area's standards.
- Assignment leverage: honest, complete conflict declaration protects the paper from a forced late reassignment to a less suitable reviewer.
- Champion leverage: the technical overview is written for the PC member who must defend the paper in discussion; give that person the three sentences they will repeat in the meeting.
- No leverage: contacting reviewers, lobbying the chair, or updating the preprint with "response to reviews" mid-cycle. None of these reach the decision; the last can violate anonymity rules.
Outcomes and their meanings
- Accept. All accepted papers get talks under the TheoryFest program. The PC may additionally designate up to four Best Papers (chosen by the PC subset without submissions), and all-student-author papers compete automatically for the Danny Lewin Best Student Paper Award (SIGACT prize pages, checked 2026-07-08).
- Reject. At a venue accepting a modest fraction of submissions (exact rate
per cycle: 待核实), rejection frequently reads "true and correct, but not
STOC-scale." The reviews distinguish which axis failed — correctness doubts
demand repair; significance doubts demand either a stronger result or a
better-matched venue (
stoc-topic-selection); breadth doubts often just mean SODA/CCC/ITCS was the right first stop. - Rejected papers commonly resurface at the next FOCS with visible
improvements; the reviewing pools overlap heavily, and committees notice both
improvement and its absence (
stoc-workflowplans this cycle).
Cycle-volatility warnings
- PC chair, committee, meeting format, review-form wording, and any feedback experiments are re-decided annually; the LLM-feedback program was explicitly labeled an experiment for 2026 (待核实 for future cycles).
- Double-blind is recent at STOC and its detailed rules (preprint interaction, conflict granularity) may be refined; re-read the live CFP each fall.
Output format
[Stage] pre-submission / under review / decided
[Reader model] <PC-member story vs subreviewer-proof story both present?>
[Committee axes at risk] correctness / significance / breadth / technique / presentation
[Timeline expectation] <next event and date, from the live cycle>
[If rejected] <axis that failed -> repair, re-scope, or re-route>© 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 STOC-Skills/skills/stoc-review-process of brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills.
Open the folder on GitHubat commit 932eb23
Compare with similar skills
Stoc 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Stoc Review Process this skillbrycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills | 1.2k | — | ~1.7k | Automated safety check: Pass | MIT | |
| Acm Symposium On Theory Of Computingfranklee16/academic-research-skills | 223 | 1 repos | ~1.9k | Automated safety check: Pass | None | |
| 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 | |
| Integration Theoryparcadei/Continuous-Claude-v3 | 3.9k | 1 repos | ~929 | Automated safety check: Notes | MIT |
Similar skills
Deepseek Reason
ruvnet/ruflo
Reasoning-mode completion against DeepSeek's deepseek-reasoner model (R1) via /v1/chat/completions.
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.
Integration Theory
parcadei/Continuous-Claude-v3
Problem-solving strategies for integration theory in measure theory
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.
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 Stoc Review Process
What does Stoc Review Process do?
A skill your agent uses when reasoning about how a STOC (ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing) submission is evaluated — the SIGACT program-committee model with external subreviewers, HotCRP…. Stoc Review Process is an agent skill from brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills. Use when reasoning about how a STOC (ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing) submission is evaluated — the SIGACT program-committee model with external subreviewers, HotCRP mechanics, double-blind conflicts, the November-to-February decision arc, and what best-paper designation and rejection each actually mean.
When should I use Stoc Review Process?
Stoc Review Process fits situations like: hotCRP mechanics; double-blind conflicts; the November-to-February decision arc; what best-paper designation and rejection each actually mean.
How do I install Stoc Review Process in Claude Code?
Run `npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill stoc-review-process -a claude-code`. Or copy the skill folder (STOC-Skills/skills/stoc-review-process in brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills) into .claude/skills/stoc-review-process in your project. Claude Code loads it when a task matches its description.
How do I install Stoc Review Process in Codex?
Run `npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill stoc-review-process -a codex`. Or copy the skill folder (STOC-Skills/skills/stoc-review-process in brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills) into .agents/skills/stoc-review-process in your project. Codex loads it when a task matches its description.
Can I use Stoc 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 stoc-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/stoc-review-process, .gemini/skills/stoc-review-process, .github/skills/stoc-review-process and .opencode/skills/stoc-review-process in your project.
What does Stoc Review Process need to run?
SKILL.md names no scripts, command-line tools or credentials: Stoc Review Process is instructions for the agent only.
Does Stoc 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 Stoc 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 Stoc Review Process use?
Stoc 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 Stoc Review Process use?
About 1.7k tokens (SKILL.md is roughly 6.7k 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 Stoc Review Process?
Skills that share tags, products or a category with Stoc Review Process: Acm Symposium On Theory Of Computing (franklee16/academic-research-skills, 223 stars), Deepseek Reason (ruvnet/ruflo, 74k stars), Ejentum Reasoning Harness (sickn33/agentic-awesome-skills, 47k stars) and Nowait Reasoning Optimizer (davila7/claude-code-templates, 33k stars). The comparison table on this page puts their stars, adoption, token cost, safety result and licence side by side.
Who maintains Stoc 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.