asplos-review-process
Use when reasoning about how an ASPLOS submission will be judged — the two-page rapid-review screen and what it filters, full double-blind review, the author-response window, the Accept / Major Revision / Reject outcome set, how revisions are re-reviewed as submissions, and where authors actually hold leverage in each stage.
Profile →npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill asplos-review-process --agent claude-code
Same command for any agent — swap --agent for codex, cursor, copilot.
Weekly change comes from our own snapshots, not the repository page — it measures attention, not adoption.
# ASPLOS Review Process ASPLOS 2027 runs a staged pipeline that differs from every sibling venue in two places: an explicit **rapid-review screen on the first two pages**, and a **Major Revision** outcome with journal-like mechanics. Everything below is the 2027 cycle as verified 2026-07-08; stage design is re-decided per edition. ## Stage map | Stage | Who reads what | Author leverage | |---|---|---| | Rapid review | Committee members read **pages 1-2 only**, double-blind | Total — you wrote those pages | | Full review | Full paper, double-blind, multiple reviewers | High before submission, zero during | | Author response | Reviews + your rebuttal (reading expectation ≈ 800 words) | Moderate — corrections and answers land | | Decision | Accept / **Major Revision** / Reject | None | | Revision re-review | Revised paper + change note, judged as a submission | High — the requirements are written down | ## What the rapid review is for — in the CFP's own framing The 2027 CFP models the screen on early triage at high-impact journals: most submissions may not advance past it, and the point is to concentrate expert reviewer effort on papers where the committee can review with high confide
- Stage map
- What the rapid review is for — in the CFP's own framing
- Full review: what systems-intersection reviewers probe
- The Major Revision channel, precisely
- Response window mechanics
- Confidentiality and conduct facts
- Reading a review packet for structure, not sentiment
- The pipeline on a calendar
- Between-cycles calibration
- Output format
What does the asplos-review-process skill do?
Use when reasoning about how an ASPLOS submission will be judged — the two-page rapid-review screen and what it filters, full double-blind review, the author-response window, the Accept / Major Revision / Reject outcome set, how revisions are re-reviewed as submissions, and where authors actually hold leverage in each stage.
How do I install it?
Run `npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill asplos-review-process --agent claude-code` — it drops the skill into your project so the agent can pick it up. Swap the --agent value for codex, cursor or copilot if you use one of those.
Where does this skill come from?
From brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills, a repository with 909 stars. We read it straight from the repository tree rather than a submitted listing, so what you see here is what is actually published.
Is a popular skill a good skill?
Not necessarily. Stars measure attention, not adoption — a repository can trend for a week and be abandoned. That is why we show the weekly change from our own snapshots next to the total, instead of a single flattering number.