hri-review-process
Use to understand and navigate the ACM/IEEE HRI full-paper review pipeline — the initial desk check and track assignment, the 1AC/2AC plus three external reviewers, the double-blind two-phase model, the author rebuttal, the online reviewer discussion, the program-committee meeting, and the per-track subcommittees — and to see where author leverage exists.
Profile →npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill hri-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.
# HRI Review Process Understanding HRI's pipeline tells you where your effort actually moves the outcome. HRI runs a **double-blind, two-phase** review with a real **rebuttal** and a **program-committee meeting** — closer to a rigorous conference model than to a journal R&R, but with a discussion culture that gives the rebuttal genuine weight. Contribution-typed **subcommittees** mean your paper is judged by reviewers matched to its track. This skill models the pipeline; `hri-author-response` covers writing the rebuttal. Mechanics below are the HRI 2026 cycle (see `resources/official-source-map.md`). ## The pipeline, stage by stage 1. **Initial check (desk stage).** Program-Committee Chairs, Track Chairs, and Area Chairs screen submissions for **desk rejections** (over length, anonymity violations, out of scope) and **track changes** (moving a paper to a better-fitting subcommittee). Clearing this stage is entirely in your control — see `hri-submission`. 2. **Assignment.** Each paper is assigned within its **track/subcommittee** to a **1AC (primary area chair)** and a **2AC (secondary)**. The 1AC recruits **three external reviewers** — experts in the topic who are not on the progra
- The pipeline, stage by stage
- What reviewers are told to value
- Where author leverage actually is
- Calibrating your expectations
- Reading your reviews
- Reverify each cycle
- Output format
What does the hri-review-process skill do?
Use to understand and navigate the ACM/IEEE HRI full-paper review pipeline — the initial desk check and track assignment, the 1AC/2AC plus three external reviewers, the double-blind two-phase model, the author rebuttal, the online reviewer discussion, the program-committee meeting, and the per-track subcommittees — and to see where author leverage exists.
How do I install it?
Run `npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill hri-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.