eccv-review-process
Use when modeling how ECCV review actually works — the OpenReview pipeline from March registration to June decisions, the 2026 reviewer-duty enforcement that desk-rejects authors of late or LLM-written reviews, rebuttal-to-AC-discussion dynamics, and what the ECVA-run, Springer-published structure means for outcomes.
Profile →npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill eccv-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.
# ECCV Review Process Use this to reason about what happens to an ECCV paper between upload and decision. ECCV is run by the **European Computer Vision Association (ECVA)** with per-edition program chairs; there is no standing editorial board, and process rules are rewritten every two years — the 2026 mechanics below are verified anchors (2026-07-08), not permanent law. ## The 2026 pipeline | Stage | 2026 dates | What actually happens | |---|---|---| | Registration → submission | Feb 26 → Mar 5 | OpenReview record created; late profile fixes until Mar 2 | | Review period | Mar 13 → Jun 17 | ACs assign; reviewers work on OpenReview | | Reviews to authors | May 2 | Typically three reviews with ratings | | Rebuttal | due May 11; to reviewers May 12 | One page, two-column, references included | | AC discussion → decision | May–Jun; decisions **Jun 17** | AC synthesizes; borderline fates decided here | | Camera-ready | Jun 30 AoE (extended) | Springer LNCS pipeline takes over | ## The 2026 enforcement regime The distinctive 2026 process fact: **review quality was enforced against authors**. All authors were expected to be willing to review if asked, and: - A reviewer missing the review
- The 2026 pipeline
- The 2026 enforcement regime
- Who is reading
- Reading the decision mechanics
- After the decision
- Output format
What does the eccv-review-process skill do?
Use when modeling how ECCV review actually works — the OpenReview pipeline from March registration to June decisions, the 2026 reviewer-duty enforcement that desk-rejects authors of late or LLM-written reviews, rebuttal-to-AC-discussion dynamics, and what the ECVA-run, Springer-published structure means for outcomes.
How do I install it?
Run `npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill eccv-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.