stoc-review-process
Use when reasoning about how a STOC (ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing) submission is evaluated — the SIGACT program-committee model with external subreviewers, HotCRP mechanics, double-blind conflicts, the November-to-February decision arc, and what best-paper designation and rejection each actually mean.
Profile →npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill stoc-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.
# STOC Review Process Model for the anchor cycle: STOC 2026 submissions went to HotCRP (`stoc26.hotcrp.com`) by November 4, 2025, and decisions were emailed on or before February 1, 2026 — a roughly thirteen-week arc with no author-visible intermediate stage announced in the CFP (checked 2026-07-08). The PC chair was Artur Czumaj (University of Warwick); chairs and committees are reconstituted every year by SIGACT, so treat all names as one-cycle facts. ## Who actually reads the paper STOC uses the classical theory model, not the ML area-chair pyramid: - A single program committee of several dozen theoreticians covers the whole field; each paper is assigned to a handful of PC members. - PC members widely delegate detailed proof-reading to **external subreviewers** — often the postdoc or specialist closest to the sub-area. In practice the most technically engaged report on your paper is frequently written by someone not on the PC at all. - The PC member then argues the paper's case (or its dismissal) in HotCRP discussion and, for contested papers, at the (physical or virtual) PC meeting. Papers near the boundary live or die on whether *one* PC member is willing to champion them agai
- Who actually reads the paper
- What the committee optimizes
- Timeline anatomy (2026 cycle)
- Double-blind mechanics, HotCRP flavor
- Where author leverage exists (and doesn't)
- Outcomes and their meanings
- Cycle-volatility warnings
- Output format
What does the stoc-review-process skill do?
Use when reasoning about how a STOC (ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing) submission is evaluated — the SIGACT program-committee model with external subreviewers, HotCRP mechanics, double-blind conflicts, the November-to-February decision arc, and what best-paper designation and rejection each actually mean.
How do I install it?
Run `npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill stoc-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.