agentsclimarketplace

Journal of machine learning research

Skill brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills/English-NaturalScience-Journal-Skills/skills/journal-of-machine-learning-research

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。

Install
npx -y skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill journal-of-machine-learning-research

Assembled 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 targeting Journal of Machine Learning Research (JMLR) or deciding whether a machine learning methods or theory manuscript fits this open-access venue. Encodes the journal's fit, framing, method-and-evidence bar, house style, official-submission re-check, and desk-reject heuristics.

SKILL.md

7.8 KB, as published. Nobody here has run it

Journal of Machine Learning Research (journal-of-machine-learning-research)

Journal positioning

Journal of Machine Learning Research (JMLR) is the primary open-access, society-run archival journal for machine learning research, publishing since 2000 under a non-profit model with no article-processing charges. It is editorially independent, author-friendly in format, and strongly archival in culture: the expectation is rigorous methods and theory, open code, and lasting scientific contribution — not fast-paced competitive benchmarking. JMLR is read by the global ML research community as a reference for foundational methods, algorithms, and theory. It is not a conference proceedings replacement and does not reward framing calibrated to leaderboard position.

This skill is a fit / venue-selection / re-framing tool. It does not replace the journal's current official submission guidelines. Before submitting, re-check the live author instructions on the JMLR site (jmlr.org) and the editorial submission system.

When to trigger

  • The author names JMLR as the target venue.
  • An ML methods or theory paper requires the archival, no-APC, open-access format and the author is assessing fit versus TPAMI, NeurIPS journal track, or Nature Machine Intelligence.
  • A paper provides a rigorous theoretical analysis, a new algorithmic framework, or a well-grounded empirical methodology for which JMLR's archival depth is appropriate.
  • The author wants to understand JMLR's editorial culture and rejection profile.

Scope & topic fit

  • Machine learning algorithms: supervised, unsupervised, semi-supervised, reinforcement, and self-supervised learning methods with rigorous analysis or strong theoretical grounding.
  • Statistical learning theory: generalization bounds, PAC learning, information-theoretic analyses, minimax rates.
  • Optimization for machine learning: convergence analysis, stochastic optimization, second-order methods.
  • Probabilistic graphical models, Bayesian methods, and approximate inference with theoretical or methodological depth.
  • Kernel methods, ensemble methods, and classical ML methods — still in scope when the contribution is rigorous.
  • Software and datasets track (JMLR has separate tracks): significant open-source software or benchmark datasets that serve the ML community.

Method & evidence bar

  • Rigor over novelty-signaling: a contribution must be technically correct, well-motivated, and clearly situated relative to the existing literature — the standard is a careful journal referee, not a crowd-sourced conference review.
  • Theory papers must include correct, complete proofs; informal arguments or proof sketches are insufficient as the primary contribution; clearly label theorems, lemmas, and corollaries.
  • Empirical papers must demonstrate the method's behavior across multiple settings, include ablations, and characterize when and why the method works; cherry-picked favorable benchmarks are a known failure mode.
  • Code availability is expected and is integral to JMLR's open-science identity; the software should be usable and documented.
  • Reproducibility: all hyperparameters, implementation details, and random seeds must be reported; results should be reproducible from the paper and associated code.
  • JMLR has no page limits; papers should be as long as needed for completeness, and not padded.

Structure & house style

  • JMLR publishes in its own open-access format with no mandatory double-column template, but follows standard ML paper conventions; re-check current style files.
  • The abstract should convey the technical problem, the approach, and the main result concisely; JMLR readers are ML specialists, so technical language is appropriate.
  • A thorough related-work section is expected and valued: JMLR referees will notice omissions; the section should explain technical relationships, not just list papers.
  • No length limit: use appendices and supplementary material for proofs, additional experiments, and extended derivations; but the main text should be self-contained for the central claims.
  • The Software track and Datasets and Benchmarks track have their own submission formats; check current JMLR track instructions.
  • References should follow JMLR style; re-check the current style guide.

Official-submission checklist

  • Before giving submission-ready advice, read ../../resources/source-basis.md and ../../resources/official-source-map.md; start from the official source anchors for this journal family, then cite the current journal-specific page you checked.
  • Visit jmlr.org for the current submission instructions; there is no APC and no standard commercial publisher portal.
  • Re-check which JMLR track is appropriate (regular, Software, Datasets & Benchmarks) and follow that track's specific requirements.
  • Confirm code release: a working implementation accessible from the paper is the norm, not the exception.
  • Ensure all proofs (for theory papers) are complete and correctly stated; plan for extended appendix if needed.
  • Check the current JMLR policy on prior conference versions of the paper.
  • Complete JMLR's author disclosure requirements (competing interests, funding).
  • If the live official instructions conflict with this skill, the official instructions win.

Pre-submission self-check

  • One sentence stating the technical contribution: algorithm, theory result, or method — and what problem it definitively addresses.
  • All theoretical claims are supported by complete, formally stated proofs (theorem + proof, not informal argument).
  • Empirical evaluation covers multiple settings, baselines, and ablations; implementation details allow reproduction.
  • Code is publicly available and documented; the link is included in the paper.
  • Related work correctly positions the contribution relative to technically adjacent ML literature.
  • If submitting a prior conference version, the extension is clearly documented and meets JMLR policy.

Common desk-reject triggers

  • Incremental improvement on a standard benchmark with no theoretical insight, algorithmic novelty, or understanding of why it works.
  • Theory paper with informal proofs or proof sketches presented as the primary contribution without complete formal arguments.
  • No code release and no compelling reason for the omission; reproducibility failure.
  • Related work that ignores technically close prior work in the ML literature.
  • A paper calibrated to conference hype cycles (incremental SOTA claim, NeurIPS/ICML framing) without the depth and completeness JMLR expects.

Re-routing decision

Papers with computer vision emphasis and archival evaluation → ieee-transactions-on-pattern-analysis-and-machine-intelligence. Papers with broader AI significance or real-world application framing for a mixed audience → nature-machine-intelligence. Papers with robotics integration and system-level demonstration → science-robotics. Fast-paced new results where archival depth is not yet possible → ML conference venues.

Output format

[Fit] High / Medium / Low (one-line reason)
[Target] Journal of Machine Learning Research
[Topic tags] <2–3 closest topics>
[Method/evidence] <does the technical rigor, proof completeness, and reproducibility clear the JMLR bar?>
[Top risk] <the single most likely reason for rejection>
[Official items to re-check] <track selection / code availability / proof completeness / prior-version policy / disclosures>
[Re-route suggestion] <if not a fit, a better-matched venue>

Keep looking

Skills are one crate of 328,083. Ordering is by how many stacks a row turns up in, so the top of any crate is what has actually been picked rather than what has the most stars.