Individual skill
pods-review-process
Use when reasoning about how an ACM PODS submission is evaluated, covering lightweight double-anonymous review, the multi-cycle-per-year calendar, the two reviewing rounds within a cycle, the 48-hour rebuttal, the accept/reject/revision decision with a shepherded revision, PACMMOD-track publication, and how PODS differs from SIGMOD's rounds and ICDT's process.
PODS-Skills/skills/pods-review-process/SKILL.md
Source commit 932eb23331721b16e967c59f093781be1928b498
What was checked
- Matches the observed repository HEAD
- Yes
- Scanner rules are current
- Yes
- Repository scan complete
- No
- Skill scan complete
- Yes
- Observed behavior
- Network or broad shell
- Last checked
- Nov 9, 2026
These are observations at the recorded commit, not a guarantee of safety. Review the source before running it.
Install this skill
Choose an agent in your Stack or copy a command below. Commands fetch the pinned commit and copy only this skill directory. Existing destinations are refused. Copying a command does not install anything.
An install command is unavailable: current rules, complete repository and skill scans, an eligible behavior level and a permitted license are required.
Repository context
- Repository stars (not skill ratings)
- 1,405
- Repository last updated
- Sep 27, 2026
- License
- MIT
Observed agent integration: No specific integration evidence. Standard SKILL.md installation does not imply verified compatibility.
- academic-writing Repository topic
- agent-skills Repository topic
- journal Repository topic
- academic-research Repository topic
- ai-agents Repository topic
- anthropic Repository topic
- awesome-list Repository topic
- claude Repository topic
- claude-code Repository topic
- economics Repository topic
- operations Derived category
- productivity Derived category
Files and excerpt
File metadata and permitted, redacted excerpts come from the recorded scan. Source links are pinned to that commit.
Browse files
SKILL.mdcore · 6,392 bytes
Read excerpt
# PODS Review Process
Model the pipeline before interpreting any single review. PODS review is done by **database
theoreticians** who will read your proofs, and the process is **multi-cycle** with a **revision**
round: a paper is not simply accepted or rejected on the first read — a **revision** decision (minor
or major) with a shepherd is a first-class outcome. The most consequential mental shift for authors
arriving from a plain accept/reject conference is that the **revision** is a real, shepherded second
round inside the same cycle.
## Process model
- Submission and review run on **EasyChair** with **lightweight double-anonymity**: author identities
are hidden from reviewers, self-citations are third-person, and a conflict-of-interest list is
declared at submission.