Aistats workflow
Skill brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills/AISTATS-Skills/skills/aistats-workflow
Journal-specific Claude Code/Codex skill packs covering mainstream journals — AER, QJE, Nature, Cell, 管理世界, 经济研究 & 200+ more — your fast track to getting published. ｜ 覆盖主流期刊的 Claude Code/Codex 期刊技能包，从选题、识别策略到表格规范与审稿回复全流程，助你快速发论文。
npx -y skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill aistats-workflowAssembled from the repository path, not quoted from the project. Check it against their README if it does not work.
What its author says it does
Copied from the file, not written here
Use when planning an AISTATS project timeline from venue fit through abstract submission, full-paper upload, supplementary material, review release, author-reviewer discussion, decision, camera-ready, PMLR publication, registration, presentation, and artifact release, with backward-planning offsets for theory-plus-experiments papers.
SKILL.md
3.9 KB, as published. Nobody here has run it
AISTATS Workflow
Use this as the project-management skill for an AISTATS submission. Replace all dates with the current official timetable and work backwards from OpenReview cutoffs.
AISTATS is a conference, not a journal: it has no standing editor-in-chief and no article-processing charge. The rotating leadership is the per-edition General Chairs and Program Chairs (2026 General Chairs: Emtiyaz Khan and Yingzhen Li; Program Chairs: Arno Solin and Aaditya Ramdas, verified 2026-06-22), and the cost model is registration fees, not APCs — PMLR proceedings are open-access with no author fee. Conference organizers rotate yearly, so re-check the current CFP and organization page rather than carrying a name forward.
Milestones
- Venue fit: confirm the contribution is genuinely at the AI, ML, and statistics interface.
- Evidence lock: freeze theorem statements, assumptions, experiments, simulations, baselines, reproducibility checklist, and supplement contents.
- Abstract deadline: submit real title, abstract, authors, subject areas, and conflicts.
- Full-paper deadline: upload anonymous PDF and required OpenReview fields.
- Supplement deadline: upload anonymized appendix/code/data if current cycle allows or requires separate supplementary material.
- Review release: triage correctness, statistical validity, novelty, clarity, and reproducibility concerns.
- Discussion period: draft concise anonymous text-only clarifications; avoid forbidden links or unsupported new results.
- Decision: archive reviews, discussion, meta-review, decision, and submitted versions.
- Acceptance: prepare PMLR camera-ready files, registration, in-person presentation, and public artifact release.
Backward plan from the paper deadline
| Weeks out (heuristic) | Theory-plus-experiments milestone |
|---|---|
| 8+ | Theorems proved, assumption set frozen |
| 6 | Simulations designed against each theorem |
| 4 | Real-data runs complete, seeds logged |
| 3 | Full draft sitting in AISTATS two-column format |
| 2 | Internal mock review by a statistics-minded reader |
| 1 | Checklist pass, anonymity sweep, supplement assembly |
| 0 | Abstract then full paper on OpenReview; supplement by its own cutoff |
These offsets are planning heuristics only — anchor every one of them to the current official timetable, never to a previous cycle's calendar.
Failure modes by stage
- Theory still moving at week 3 forces last-minute theorem edits nobody has verified — the classic AISTATS correctness reject in the making.
- Leaving format conversion to the final week surfaces overflow late, because two-column math is far tighter than a one-column working draft.
- Skipping the mock review forfeits the only chance to hear "your experiments violate Assumption 2" from a friend instead of a reviewer.
- Building the supplement after the paper deadline under time pressure is how anonymity leaks ship.
Coordination notes
- Assign one named owner for the reproducibility checklist and another for the anonymity sweep; shared ownership is how both slip.
- Archive the exact submitted PDF, supplement, and checklist, since discussion-phase replies must quote them precisely.
Output format
[Current stage] idea / experiments / writing / abstract / submission / supplement / discussion / accepted
[Next official deadline] <date and source, or unknown>
[Critical path] <three tasks that determine readiness>
[Risk register] <page/anonymity/statistical evidence/supplement/reproducibility/presentation>
[Owner map] <task -> person or role>