sensys-review-process
Use when interpreting SenSys's two-deadline, self-contained review model — what a first-deadline outcome means, that a reject may return at the second deadline only with a substantive revision and Response to Reviewers, how systems reviewers weigh energy and deployment evidence, and how to classify a notification before drafting a response.
Profile →npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill sensys-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.
# SenSys Review Process SenSys does not run a single annual verdict. It runs **two submission deadlines per cycle, each a self-contained review round**, and the connective tissue between them is a **resubmission rule**: a paper rejected at one deadline may re-enter at the next **only with a substantive revision and a "Response to Reviewers"** that maps each concern to a specific change. Reading your notification correctly means knowing which move the process is offering you. ## The outcome space | Outcome | What it means | Your move | |---|---|---| | **Accept** | The paper is in the edition the deadline feeds | `sensys-artifact-evaluation` + `sensys-camera-ready` | | **Reject** | Not accepted at this deadline | Decide whether to **resubmit with revision** at the next deadline, or route elsewhere | | **Resubmit with revision** (next deadline) | The path the two-deadline model offers, not an automatic invitation | Treat the reviews as the required-changes list; see `sensys-author-response` | Note that whether a given cycle also offers an explicit **major-revision channel at notification** (distinct from the first→second deadline resubmission) is **待核实** — read the current CFP; do not
- The outcome space
- What SenSys reviewers weigh
- Classifying a notification before you respond
- Confidentiality and conduct
- Reviewer continuity across deadlines
- Output format
What does the sensys-review-process skill do?
Use when interpreting SenSys's two-deadline, self-contained review model — what a first-deadline outcome means, that a reject may return at the second deadline only with a substantive revision and Response to Reviewers, how systems reviewers weigh energy and deployment evidence, and how to classify a notification before drafting a response.
How do I install it?
Run `npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill sensys-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.