agentsclimarketplace

Sigir workflow

Skill brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills/SIGIR-Skills/skills/sigir-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。

Install
npx -y skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill sigir-workflow

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 planning a SIGIR project calendar — backward-planning from the January-pattern abstract/paper deadlines to the July conference, sequencing evidence freeze, significance testing, and anonymization, coordinating multi-track decisions, and wiring the SIGIR/ECIR/CIKM/WSDM/SIGIR-AP fallback calendar into one pipeline.

SKILL.md

6.1 KB, ~1.4k tokens by cl100k_base, as published. Nobody here has run it

SIGIR Workflow

SIGIR is an annual single-cycle venue with a distinctive rhythm: recent editions put the full-paper deadline in mid-January (2025: abstract Jan 16, paper Jan 23; 2026 trackers reported Jan 15/22 — exact dates 待核实 on the current Key Dates page), notification in early spring, camera-ready in late April (Apr 29, 2026 verified for Resources/LRE), and the conference in July (2026: July 20-24, Melbourne). Secondary tracks stagger a few weeks behind the full-paper dates. Plan backward from the dates you verify, and treat every date in this file as a pattern anchor, not a promise.

SIGIR is a conference run by ACM SIGIR (the special interest group): there is no standing editor-in-chief — program leadership rotates per edition — and no journal-style APC; costs arrive as registration and travel, with ACM Open status determining any publication-fee exposure per institution (待核实).

The annual shape

Phase (pattern)Months (recent cycles)Owner's job
Track decision + scopingAug-OctPick full/short/resource/repro target; freeze claim
Evidence buildOct-DecCollections, baselines, runs, ablations
Writing + auditsDec-JanStyle, related-work, submission audits
Abstract → paper deadlinesmid-JanMetadata frozen a week early; PDF last
Review windowFeb-MarResponse prep if a channel opens; next-venue scouting
Notification → camera-readyMar-AprTAPS pipeline, artifacts public
ConferenceJulPresentation, community work

Backward plan from the paper deadline

Weeks outMilestone for a ranking/retrieval paper
10+Claim frozen; collection lineup chosen against the claim's scope
8Baselines reproduced at current strength, tuning protocol logged
6Main results stable across seeds; ablation matrix running
4Full draft in sigconf; significance script wired to run files
3Internal mock review by an evaluation-minded reader
2Repository mirror anonymized; PAPER_MAP written
1Submission audit (sigir-submission); PC nominee confirmed; buffer
0Abstract by its deadline, PDF by its deadline, both AoE

The two-stage deadline is a real gate: the abstract registers title, authors, and track, and late abstracts close the door regardless of PDF readiness. Freeze the author list before the abstract — ACM authorship policy makes later changes painful.

Multi-track coordination

Groups often have several irons: a full paper, a short paper from a side finding, a resource from the data work. SIGIR's cross-track double-submission ban makes this a planning problem, not just an ethics one:

  • Assign each contribution to exactly one track before the abstract deadline.
  • Stagger risk: if the full paper is rejected, which parts return as a short paper or resource paper next cycle? Write the modular repo accordingly.
  • The Resources track's own calendar (2026: abstract Feb 5, notify Apr 2, camera Apr 29) runs weeks behind full papers — a rejected-dataset-chapter salvage plan is sometimes executable in the same year. Verify each cycle.

The fallback calendar

IR has a dense venue ring, so a SIGIR reject waits weeks, not a year:

Typical resubmission ring (verify each venue's current dates):
SIGIR (Jan deadline, Jul conf)
  -> CIKM     (~May/Jun deadline, Nov conf)   broader IR+KM+DB scope
  -> SIGIR-AP (~Jul deadline, Dec conf)       regional; has advertised an R&R route
  -> WSDM     (~Aug deadline, Feb/Mar conf)   web search + data mining angle
  -> ECIR     (~Sep/Oct deadline, Mar/Apr conf) European IR, full+repro tracks
  -> back to SIGIR (Jan)
Journal exits: TOIS / TOIS-adjacent for work that outgrew 9 pages.

Each hop costs a re-framing pass, not just a re-upload: CIKM wants the knowledge/ data-management angle sharpened, WSDM the web/user-data angle, ECIR welcomes reproducibility framing. Budget one week per hop for venue-fit revision.

Ownership map

Deadline collapses at SIGIR are usually ownership failures, not effort failures. Assign by name, once, in the scoping phase:

DeliverableSingle owner's duty
Run files + significance scriptOne person regenerates every table end-to-end
Baseline tuning logProves symmetry claims during review
Anonymization sweepNames, logs, leaderboards, metadata, repo history
OpenReview metadata + PC nomineeAbstract-deadline gate; nominee agreed in advance
Camera-ready/TAPSStarts the week of notification, not the week of the deadline

Shared ownership of the anonymization sweep is the classic failure: everyone assumes someone else checked the PDF metadata.

Failure modes by phase

  • Claim still moving at week 6 → the collection lineup no longer matches the claim; scope-narrow now rather than during reviews.
  • Baselines start in week 4 → tuning symmetry becomes unprovable; this is the most-cited fatal review at this venue.
  • Anonymization at week 0 → leaderboard rows, repo history, and system names leak under deadline pressure (see sigir-submission).
  • Response window opens and nobody owns run files → coordinate-based replies become impossible; archive the exact submitted PDF + runs at upload time.
  • Camera-ready collides with teaching/travel in April → TAPS proofs get rubber-stamped; schedule the proof check like a review, not a formality.

Output format

[Current phase] scoping / evidence / writing / submitted / responding / camera-ready
[Verified dates] <each from the live Key Dates page, with URL + check date>
[Backward plan] next three milestones with owners
[Track map] contribution -> track, cross-track conflicts: none / <list>
[Fallback route] <next two venues with verified deadlines>
[Risk register] <top risk from the failure-mode list>

What ships with it

Read from the repository

Just SKILL.md. No reference files, no scripts.

Keep looking

Skills are one crate of 327,132. 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.