infocom-review-process
Use when reasoning about how an IEEE INFOCOM submission is evaluated, covering the large-scale double-blind pipeline, automated paper-reviewer assignment, the two-tier TPC and early-reject phase, the (traditional) absence of an author rebuttal, TPC discussion, and how INFOCOM's process differs from SIGCOMM/NSDI rebuttal-driven reviewing.
Profile →npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill infocom-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.
# INFOCOM Review Process Model the pipeline before interpreting any single review. INFOCOM's process is **large-scale and TPC-driven**: thousands of submissions are matched to a broad Technical Program Committee by an **automated assignment system**, screened through an **early-reject** phase, and decided in TPC discussion. The most consequential mental shift for authors arriving from SIGCOMM/NSDI is that INFOCOM has **traditionally offered no author rebuttal** — the submitted PDF must defend itself, because you likely never get a turn to reply. ## Process model - Submission and review run on **EDAS** with **double-blind** anonymity: identities are hidden from reviewers throughout. - **Automated review assignment** matches each manuscript to TPC members by comparing the paper's content to reviewers' representative publications. Your topic tags and abstract are the levers that route you to the right subarea — a mis-tagged paper lands with reviewers who read it as a visitor. - **Early-reject phase.** INFOCOM 2027 posts an **early-reject notification (9 Oct 2026)** weeks before the final acceptance notification (8 Dec 2026). Papers that are out of scope, violate the double-blind/lengt
- Process model
- Reading a decision against the categories
- How INFOCOM differs from its siblings
- Who reads you
- Where author leverage actually exists
- Misreadings to avoid
- Output format
What does the infocom-review-process skill do?
Use when reasoning about how an IEEE INFOCOM submission is evaluated, covering the large-scale double-blind pipeline, automated paper-reviewer assignment, the two-tier TPC and early-reject phase, the (traditional) absence of an author rebuttal, TPC discussion, and how INFOCOM's process differs from SIGCOMM/NSDI rebuttal-driven reviewing.
How do I install it?
Run `npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill infocom-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.