icse-review-process
Use when reasoning about how an ICSE research-track submission is evaluated, covering double-anonymous PC review, the four posted criteria, the Accept / Major Revision / Reject decision model, the revision-and-final-decision timeline, and what recent ICSE acceptance statistics imply for strategy.
Profile →npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill icse-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.
# ICSE Review Process Model the pipeline before you interpret any single review. ICSE's process differs from most CS conferences in one structural way: **Major Revision is a real decision category**, not a euphemism for rejection, and a large share of accepted papers arrive through it. ## The four scored criteria The ICSE 2027 call (read 2026-07-08) evaluates each paper on: 1. **Novelty** — originality of solutions, problem formulations, methodologies, theories, or evaluations relative to the state of the art. 2. **Rigor** — soundness, clarity, and depth of the technical or theoretical contribution, and thoroughness/completeness of the evaluation. 3. **Relevance** — significance and potential impact on software engineering. 4. **Verifiability and Transparency** — whether the paper contains enough information to understand how the innovation works, how data was obtained and analyzed, and whether independent verification or replication is supported. Read every review comment as an instance of one of these. "The benchmark seems small" is a Rigor objection; "practitioners would not use this" is Relevance; "the prompt templates are not shown" is Verifiability. Diagnosing the criterion t
- The four scored criteria
- Decision model and 2027 timeline
- What the recent numbers say
- Who reads you
- Where author leverage exists
- Reading a review packet
- Misreadings to avoid
- Output format
What does the icse-review-process skill do?
Use when reasoning about how an ICSE research-track submission is evaluated, covering double-anonymous PC review, the four posted criteria, the Accept / Major Revision / Reject decision model, the revision-and-final-decision timeline, and what recent ICSE acceptance statistics imply for strategy.
How do I install it?
Run `npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill icse-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.