ecai-review-process
Use when reasoning about how an ECAI submission is evaluated — double-blind review, the summary-reject first phase, area chairs / senior PC, the single author-response (rebuttal) window, an accept/reject decision (no journal-style major-revision round), and how ECAI's process and its joint IJCAI-ECAI 2026 form differ from AAAI, IJCAI standalone, and AAMAS.
Profile →npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill ecai-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.
# ECAI Review Process Model the pipeline before interpreting any single review. ECAI runs a **single-round, double-blind conference review with a rebuttal** — not a journal-style revise-and-resubmit. The most consequential mental shift for authors arriving from a journal (or from a venue with a major- revision decision) is that there is **no second submission**: the paper you submit, plus one short author response, is the whole story. The current edition, **IJCAI-ECAI 2026**, follows the IJCAI process because ECAI 2026 is being run jointly with IJCAI. ## Process model (IJCAI-ECAI 2026) - Submission and review are **double-blind**; identities are hidden from reviewers throughout. - A **summary-reject** first phase filters clearly-out-of-scope or below-bar submissions early (IJCAI-ECAI 2026 summary-reject notification: **4 March 2026**). A paper cleared past summary reject goes to full review. - Full review is organized under **area chairs / senior PC** who oversee reviewers in a topic area and lead the discussion. Reviewers weigh significance of the AI contribution, technical soundness (proofs and/or experiments), clarity, and fit. - Authors get **one author-response (rebuttal) wind
- Process model (IJCAI-ECAI 2026)
- Reading the decision categories
- How ECAI differs from its siblings
- Who reads you
- Where author leverage actually exists
- Reading a review packet
- Misreadings to avoid
- Output format
What does the ecai-review-process skill do?
Use when reasoning about how an ECAI submission is evaluated — double-blind review, the summary-reject first phase, area chairs / senior PC, the single author-response (rebuttal) window, an accept/reject decision (no journal-style major-revision round), and how ECAI's process and its joint IJCAI-ECAI 2026 form differ from AAAI, IJCAI standalone, and AAMAS.
How do I install it?
Run `npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill ecai-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.