Hypothesis Generation
spacering-net/codeg
Structured hypothesis formulation from observations. An agent skill from spacering-net/codeg.
A skill your agent uses when interpreting the UIST review pipeline — anonymous PC-plus-external review of papers and videos, the rebuttal's role, PC-meeting decisions, conditional acceptance…
Install Uist Review Process
$ npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill uist-review-process -a claude-codeProject install by default; add -g for ~/.claude/skills/.
$ gh skill install brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills uist-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/UIST-Skills/skills/uist-review-process .claude/skills/uist-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 "uist-review-process" agent skill from https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills/tree/main/UIST-Skills/skills/uist-review-process into .claude/skills/uist-review-process/ in this project. Copy the whole folder (SKILL.md and every file beside it), keep the folder name "uist-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/UIST-Skills/skills/uist-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 uist-review-process -a codexProject install goes to .agents/skills/; add -g for ~/.codex/skills/.
$ gh skill install brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills uist-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/UIST-Skills/skills/uist-review-process .agents/skills/uist-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 "uist-review-process" agent skill from https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills/tree/main/UIST-Skills/skills/uist-review-process into .agents/skills/uist-review-process/ in this project. Copy the whole folder (SKILL.md and every file beside it), keep the folder name "uist-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 uist-review-process -a cursorProject install goes to .agents/skills/; add -g for ~/.cursor/skills/.
$ gh skill install brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills uist-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/UIST-Skills/skills/uist-review-process .cursor/skills/uist-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 "uist-review-process" agent skill from https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills/tree/main/UIST-Skills/skills/uist-review-process into .cursor/skills/uist-review-process/ in this project. Copy the whole folder (SKILL.md and every file beside it), keep the folder name "uist-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 UIST-Skills/skills/uist-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 uist-review-process -a gemini-cliProject install goes to .agents/skills/; add -g for ~/.gemini/skills/.
$ gh skill install brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills uist-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/UIST-Skills/skills/uist-review-process .gemini/skills/uist-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 "uist-review-process" agent skill from https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills/tree/main/UIST-Skills/skills/uist-review-process into .gemini/skills/uist-review-process/ in this project. Copy the whole folder (SKILL.md and every file beside it), keep the folder name "uist-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 uist-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 uist-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/UIST-Skills/skills/uist-review-process .github/skills/uist-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 "uist-review-process" agent skill from https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills/tree/main/UIST-Skills/skills/uist-review-process into .github/skills/uist-review-process/ in this project. Copy the whole folder (SKILL.md and every file beside it), keep the folder name "uist-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 uist-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 uist-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/UIST-Skills/skills/uist-review-process .opencode/skills/uist-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 "uist-review-process" agent skill from https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills/tree/main/UIST-Skills/skills/uist-review-process into .opencode/skills/uist-review-process/ in this project. Copy the whole folder (SKILL.md and every file beside it), keep the folder name "uist-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
uist-review-process- GitHub stars
- 1.2k
- Token cost
- ~1.6k tokens
- SKILL.md length
- 741 words
- Files
- 1
- Skills in repo
- 2,387
- Repo updated
- First seen
- Licence
- MIT
At a glance
A skill your agent uses when interpreting the UIST review pipeline — anonymous PC-plus-external review of papers and videos, the rebuttal's role, PC-meeting decisions, conditional acceptance…
- Works in 3 steps: Adjunct fallback, same conference. A… → Repair and resubmit to UIST next year:… → Re-route when reviews reveal a venue…
- Interpreting the UIST review pipeline — anonymous PC-plus-external review of papers and videos
- SKILL.md covers The 2026 pipeline, How systems reviewers actually…, Reading your reviews and Discussion dynamics in a small…, plus 4 more sections
- Instructions only: no scripts, shell commands, URLs or credentials in SKILL.md
What it does
Uist Review Process is an agent skill from brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills. Use when interpreting the UIST review pipeline — anonymous PC-plus-external review of papers and videos, the rebuttal's role, PC-meeting decisions, conditional acceptance mechanics, reading systems-reviewer psychology, and choosing the demo/poster fallback or resubmission path after a rejection.
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
- Interpreting the UIST review pipeline — anonymous PC-plus-external review of papers and videos
- The rebuttals role
- PC-meeting decisions
- Conditional acceptance mechanics
Example prompts
- “/uist-review-process”
Workflow steps
3 steps, taken from the first numbered list in SKILL.md.
- Adjunct fallback, same conference. A rejected paper's system is often a
- Repair and resubmit to UIST next year: use the review bins as the work plan;
- Re-route when reviews reveal a venue mismatch — "the contribution is the
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
Uist Review Process loads about 1.6k tokens when it runs. Until then it costs about 79 tokens; SKILL.md has 741 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). 741 words, ~1,608 tokens.
Download SKILL.mdSave it as
.claude/skills/uist-review-process/SKILL.md (or your agent's skills folder).- name
- uist-review-process
- description
- Use when interpreting the UIST review pipeline — anonymous PC-plus-external review of papers and videos, the rebuttal's role, PC-meeting decisions, conditional acceptance mechanics, reading systems-reviewer psychology, and choosing the demo/poster fallback or resubmission path after a rejection.
UIST Review Process
Understanding how UIST decides is mostly understanding who decides: a program committee of people who build interactive systems, supported by external reviewers drawn from the same community, converging in discussion and a PC meeting. The venue is single-track and relatively intimate — the person reviewing your haptics paper probably built a haptics device. The pipeline facts below are the 2026 cycle's (verified 2026-07-08); exact committee mechanics beyond the published dates are 待核实 each year.
The 2026 pipeline
| Stage | 2026 timing | What happens to your paper |
|---|---|---|
| Submission closes | Mar 31 | PDF + video + supplement enter PCS |
| Review period | April-May | PC members and externals review paper and video |
| Rebuttal | May 28 - Jun 5 | Authors respond in ≤ 5,000 characters |
| Discussion + PC meeting | June | Recommendations formed from submission, rebuttal, reviews, and reviewer/PC discussion |
| Notification | Jun 27 | Accept (conditional), or reject |
| Camera-ready | Jul 24 | Conditions from the rebuttal must be delivered |
Two structural notes: the decision explicitly weighs the rebuttal and the
inter-reviewer discussion, so the rebuttal is a real instrument (see
uist-author-response); and acceptances are conditional — the notification is a
contract whose terms you wrote yourself in the rebuttal.
How systems reviewers actually read
- Video first, skeptically. The initial question is "does this thing exist and work as claimed?" A missing video for a highly dynamic system starts the review from doubt.
- Novelty as capability delta. Reviewers pattern-match against the systems
canon; the related-work table is where they check whether you know it (see
uist-related-work). - Implementation as competence signal. Vague engineering prose reads as either concealment or shallow work; specific parameters and honest failure boundaries read as craft.
- Evaluation-matching, not evaluation-maximizing. A ritual study annoys
reviewers more than a well-argued demonstration portfolio (see
uist-experiments). - Enthusiasm is a real variable. UIST reviewers reward inventiveness; a technically modest but genuinely delightful idea can outscore a heavy but dull one. Write and film for the builder's grin.
Reading your reviews
Sort every reviewer point into one of four bins before reacting:
FACTUAL ERROR reviewer misread a mechanism/number -> correct, citing section
EVIDENCE GAP claim outruns measurement -> concede scope or add data
NOVELTY CHALLENGE "system X already does this" -> capability-delta answer
TASTE "I would have built it differently" -> acknowledge, do not litigateThe bins predict rebuttal leverage: factual errors and novelty challenges are winnable in 5,000 characters; evidence gaps are winnable only if the evidence already exists; taste is never winnable and costs characters.
Discussion dynamics in a small committee
Between rebuttal and notification, your paper's fate is a conversation you cannot attend. What is knowable about that phase shapes what you should have done earlier:
- Reviews converge through discussion; a champion reviewer arguing from your
rebuttal's specifics is the mechanism by which mixed reviews become accepts.
The rebuttal's job is to arm that champion (see
uist-author-response). - Expertise is uneven by design — a paper spanning fabrication and ML gets one deep expert per half; the review that "missed the point" often belongs to the other half's expert, and answering it teaches the whole committee.
- Single-track scale means PC members see a broad slice of the year's submissions; "we saw three of these this cycle" is a real dynamic, and a crisp capability delta is the defense.
- Scores move at the meeting. Borderline papers with concrete, deliverable rebuttal promises are cheap accepts; borderline papers with defensive rebuttals are cheap rejects.
Show full SKILL.md (229 more words)Show less
Calibrating expectations by decision class
| Outcome signal | What it usually means | Your move |
|---|---|---|
| Conditional accept, short condition list | Committee wants the paper; conditions are the contract | Deliver precisely; see uist-camera-ready |
| Reject, reviews ask for more evaluation | Evidence gap — repairable in one cycle | Repair plan from the review bins |
| Reject, reviews dispute novelty | Related-work or delta failure | Fix positioning before anything else |
| Reject, reviews question the contribution's home | Venue mismatch | Re-run uist-topic-selection honestly |
After rejection: the three exits
- Adjunct fallback, same conference. A rejected paper's system is often a strong Demo or Poster submission to the same edition — the adjunct deadlines fall after paper notification. This keeps the work visible, collects hallway review, and stakes a dated adjunct publication. Remember the 2026 rule: one adjunct track per work, not both.
- Repair and resubmit to UIST next year: use the review bins as the work plan; evidence-gap rejections are the most repairable class.
- Re-route when reviews reveal a venue mismatch — "the contribution is the
study, not the system" is a CHI/CSCW signal, and
uist-topic-selectionshould be re-run rather than argued with.
Confidentiality and conduct
Reviews, reviewer identities, and PC discussion are confidential; do not quote reviews publicly or attempt reviewer identification. Contact the program chairs (program2026@uist.org for the 2026 cycle) only for process failures — a genuinely missing review, a compromised anonymity situation — not to relitigate scores.
Output format
[Phase] under review / rebuttal / decided-conditional / decided-reject
[Review bins] factual <n> · evidence <n> · novelty <n> · taste <n>
[Leverage estimate] rebuttal-winnable points and why
[If rejected] adjunct fallback / repair-resubmit / re-route — with the deciding review line
[Process flags] <anything warranting a chairs contact>© 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 UIST-Skills/skills/uist-review-process of brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills.
Open the folder on GitHubat commit 932eb23
Compare with similar skills
Uist 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Uist 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 Uist Review Process
What does Uist Review Process do?
A skill your agent uses when interpreting the UIST review pipeline — anonymous PC-plus-external review of papers and videos, the rebuttal's role, PC-meeting decisions, conditional acceptance…. Uist Review Process is an agent skill from brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills. Use when interpreting the UIST review pipeline — anonymous PC-plus-external review of papers and videos, the rebuttal's role, PC-meeting decisions, conditional acceptance mechanics, reading systems-reviewer psychology, and choosing the demo/poster fallback or resubmission path after a rejection.
When should I use Uist Review Process?
Uist Review Process fits situations like: interpreting the UIST review pipeline — anonymous PC-plus-external review of papers and videos; the rebuttals role; PC-meeting decisions; conditional acceptance mechanics.
How do I install Uist Review Process in Claude Code?
Run `npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill uist-review-process -a claude-code`. Or copy the skill folder (UIST-Skills/skills/uist-review-process in brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills) into .claude/skills/uist-review-process in your project. Claude Code loads it when a task matches its description.
How do I install Uist Review Process in Codex?
Run `npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill uist-review-process -a codex`. Or copy the skill folder (UIST-Skills/skills/uist-review-process in brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills) into .agents/skills/uist-review-process in your project. Codex loads it when a task matches its description.
Can I use Uist 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 uist-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/uist-review-process, .gemini/skills/uist-review-process, .github/skills/uist-review-process and .opencode/skills/uist-review-process in your project.
What does Uist Review Process need to run?
SKILL.md names no scripts, command-line tools or credentials: Uist Review Process is instructions for the agent only.
Does Uist 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 Uist 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 Uist Review Process use?
Uist 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 Uist 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 Uist Review Process?
Skills that share tags, products or a category with Uist 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 Uist 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.