Ijoc workflow
Skill brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills/INFORMS-Journal-on-Computing-Skills/skills/ijoc-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 ijoc-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 deciding which ijoc-* sub-skill to invoke next, or when sequencing a manuscript from idea through rebuttal for an INFORMS Journal on Computing (IJOC) submission. Routes — it does not replace — the specialized skills.
SKILL.md
7.2 KB, ~1.7k tokens by cl100k_base, as published. Nobody here has run it
IJOC Workflow Router (ijoc-workflow)
Overview
This is the router. It tells you which ijoc- skill to use at the current stage* of a manuscript aimed at the INFORMS Journal on Computing (IJOC) — the INFORMS journal at the intersection of operations research / management science and computer science. IJOC judges a paper on its computational and/or methodological advance: algorithm design and analysis, exact and heuristic optimization, integer/stochastic/robust programming, simulation, computational probability, machine learning for OR, data-science methodology, and the software/computational tooling that makes OR work. A clever application alone does not clear the bar; the computing must be the contribution.
Operational tells that you are at IJOC and not a sibling: the author selects one of the journal's 10 technical areas at submission via ScholarOne (mc.manuscriptcentral.com/ijoc); the Area Editor desk-rejects roughly 40% of submissions and the associate editor's identity is never disclosed to authors; review is single-blind (reviewers see author names); and IJOC runs a distinctive reproducibility regime — accepted papers deposit code/data in the IJOC Software and Data Repository on GitHub (the INFORMSJoC organization), which snapshots a tagged release and mints a separate code DOI (….cd) alongside the article DOI. Editor-in-chief: David L. Woodruff (UC Davis), succeeding Alice E. Smith (whose term ended 2025-12-31); confirmed via INFORMS (检索于 2026-06-22;以官网为准). Re-verify volatile specifics on the official INFORMS pages.
When to trigger
- The user asks "what should I do next?" on an IJOC-bound paper
- A draft's binding constraint (scope fit, algorithmic claim, experiments, exhibits, deposit) needs naming
- Work is ping-ponging between method design, computational experiments, framing, and the response letter
- An IJOC decision letter arrived and the user must switch into revision mode
Routing table
| Current symptom | Next skill |
|---|---|
| Unsure the paper is computing-first or which of the 10 areas fits | ijoc-topic-selection |
| The algorithm/model is described but its formulation, correctness, or guarantees are loose | ijoc-theory-development |
| Contribution vs. OR/MS and CS prior art is fuzzy or oversold | ijoc-literature-positioning |
| Method choice, baselines, or experimental protocol are not pinned down | ijoc-methods |
| Computational experiments need instances, fair tuning, timing, and statistics | ijoc-data-analysis |
| The "what is new computationally" sentence is not sharp | ijoc-contribution-framing |
| Performance profiles / runtime-vs-size plots are dense or misleading | ijoc-tables-figures |
| Prose buries the method; abstract/intro do not land the advance | ijoc-writing-style |
| Page limit, LaTeX template, area choice, GitHub deposit prep | ijoc-submission |
| Want to understand AE/AE-blind timeline, desk-reject odds, or sibling transfer | ijoc-review-process |
| Received an R&R; need a response-letter and re-experiment plan | ijoc-rebuttal |
Default order
ijoc-topic-selection— confirm computing-first scope and the right areaijoc-theory-development— formulate the algorithm/model; state correctness/complexityijoc-literature-positioning— stake the advance vs. OR/MS and CS frontiersijoc-methods— method choice, baselines, experimental designijoc-data-analysis— instances, tuning, timing, statistical comparison, scalingijoc-contribution-framing— sharpen the one-sentence computational claimijoc-tables-figures— performance profiles and scaling plotsijoc-writing-style— make the advance land (abstract + intro last)ijoc-submission— page limit, template, area, GitHub deposit preflightijoc-review-process— calibrate the AE-blind cycle; consider sibling fitijoc-rebuttal— after the R&R
ijoc-writing-styleis a late polish; do not rewrite the intro before the algorithm and experiments settle.
Anti-patterns
- Treating IJOC like Operations Research (broad OR theory) or Management Science (broad MS) — IJOC wants the computing/methodology to be the news
- Confusing it with Mathematical Programming Computation (pure computational MP) or INFORMS Journal on Optimization (optimization theory) — IJOC is the OR↔computing interface across simulation, ML, probability, and tooling, not optimization alone
- Polishing exhibits or prose while the algorithm or its experiments are still moving
- Deferring the GitHub code/data deposit to "after acceptance" — design reproducibility in from the start
- Submitting to the wrong technical area and inviting a fast Area-Editor desk reject
Routing by paper archetype
IJOC spans distinct computing archetypes; the binding constraint differs by archetype. Read the archetype, then enter the chain at the right link.
| Archetype | Likely first bottleneck | Enter at |
|---|---|---|
| exact algorithm / new formulation (B&C, decomposition) | correctness + complexity + benchmark instances | ijoc-theory-development → ijoc-data-analysis |
| (meta)heuristic / matheuristic | fair tuning, baselines, statistical wins not luck | ijoc-methods → ijoc-data-analysis |
| ML-for-OR / learning-to-optimize | generalization claim + OR baseline + reproducibility | ijoc-methods → ijoc-data-analysis |
| simulation / computational probability | DGP, seeds, variance reduction, validation | ijoc-methods → ijoc-data-analysis |
| software / computational tooling | what is the methodological news beyond the tool | ijoc-contribution-framing → ijoc-submission |
Worked routing example (illustrative)
A user says: "My branch-and-cut solver beats the commercial baseline on my instances, but a referee says the win could be tuning and the instance set is cherry-picked." That is two IJOC pushbacks — unfair experimental comparison and non-representative benchmark — both owned by ijoc-data-analysis, with the formulation/cut-validity defense in ijoc-theory-development. Route to ijoc-data-analysis first: re-run on standard library instances (e.g., MIPLIB-class), tune both solvers on a disjoint set, report a performance profile and a Wilcoxon test, and disclose hardware and time limits. Only once the win survives do you return to ijoc-tables-figures and ijoc-rebuttal.
Minimal decision snippet
if decision_letter_arrived: -> ijoc-rebuttal
elif ready_to_submit: -> ijoc-submission
elif exhibits_or_profiles: -> ijoc-tables-figures
elif experiments_or_benchmarks: -> ijoc-data-analysis
elif method_or_baselines: -> ijoc-methods
elif formulation_or_guarantees: -> ijoc-theory-development
elif claim_or_positioning_fuzzy: -> ijoc-contribution-framing / ijoc-literature-positioning
else: -> ijoc-topic-selection
What ships with it
Read from the repository
Just SKILL.md. No reference files, no scripts.