sigmetrics-review-process
Use when reasoning about how an ACM SIGMETRICS submission is evaluated, covering the hybrid conference-journal model, double-anonymous review, the three first-round outcomes (Accept-with-shepherding / One-Shot Revision / Reject), the one-shot revision resubmitted to a subsequent rolling deadline, the 12-month resubmission bar, and how SIGMETRICS differs from IMC, SIGCOMM, and NSDI.
Profile →npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill sigmetrics-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.
# SIGMETRICS Review Process Model the pipeline before interpreting any single review. SIGMETRICS's process is a **hybrid of the conference and journal models**: papers are POMACS articles, and the first-round decision is one of **three** outcomes, not a binary accept/reject. The most consequential mental shift for authors arriving from a plain conference is that **One-Shot Revision** is a real revise-and-resubmit round — but, unlike an open-ended journal R&R, it is **single-shot** and re-reviewed against an explicit list of required changes. ## Process model - Submission and review run on **HotCRP**, one site per rolling deadline, with **double-anonymous** review (the Operational Systems Track may reveal the deploying org/system). - Reviewers weigh the **rigor of the model or measurement**, the **correctness of proofs**, the **validity of assumptions**, the fairness and soundness of any empirical/simulation evidence, novelty, and reproducibility. SIGMETRICS reviewers check theorems, not just plots. - **Three first-round outcomes:** - **Accept** — every accepted paper is **shepherded**, so reviewer-required changes are incorporated into the final POMACS version. - **One-Shot Revisio
- Process model
- Reading a decision against the categories
- The one-shot-revision mechanics (the distinctive SIGMETRICS move)
- How SIGMETRICS differs from its siblings
- Who reads you
- Where author leverage actually exists
- Misreadings to avoid
- Output format
What does the sigmetrics-review-process skill do?
Use when reasoning about how an ACM SIGMETRICS submission is evaluated, covering the hybrid conference-journal model, double-anonymous review, the three first-round outcomes (Accept-with-shepherding / One-Shot Revision / Reject), the one-shot revision resubmitted to a subsequent rolling deadline, the 12-month resubmission bar, and how SIGMETRICS differs from IMC, SIGCOMM, and NSDI.
How do I install it?
Run `npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill sigmetrics-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.