# Aaai Workflow

> Use when planning an AAAI project timeline from topic selection through abstract, OpenReview submission, two-phase review, rebuttal, decision, camera-ready, registration, presentation, and public artifact release.

- **Type:** Skill
- **Install:** `agentstack add skill-brycewang-stanford-awesome-journal-skills-aaai-workflow`
- **Verified:** Yes — security-reviewed for prompt injection and unsafe behavior
- **Seller:** [brycewang-stanford](https://agentstack.voostack.com/s/brycewang-stanford)
- **Installs:** 0
- **Category:** [AI & ML](https://agentstack.voostack.com/c/ai-and-ml)
- **Latest version:** 0.1.0
- **License:** MIT
- **Upstream author:** [brycewang-stanford](https://github.com/brycewang-stanford)
- **Source:** https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills/tree/main/AAAI-Skills/skills/aaai-workflow
- **Website:** https://www.copaper.ai

## Install

```sh
agentstack add skill-brycewang-stanford-awesome-journal-skills-aaai-workflow
```

Requires the [AgentStack CLI](https://agentstack.voostack.com/docs/cli). Works with Claude Code, Cursor, and any MCP-compatible agent.

## About

# AAAI Workflow

Use this as the project-management skill for an AAAI submission. Replace all dates with the current
cycle's official timetable and work backwards from OpenReview cutoffs.

AAAI 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 Program Chairs (AAAI-26: Chad Jenkins and Matthew
Taylor, verified 2026-06-22), and the cost model is registration fees, not APCs — at least one author
must register at the in-person rate to present. Conference organizers rotate yearly, so re-check the
current CFP and conference-organizers page rather than carrying a name or contact forward.

## Milestones

- Venue fit: choose Main Track, AI for Social Impact, AI Alignment, or another AAAI program.
- Evidence lock: freeze contribution, baselines, ablations, checklist answers, and supplement.
- Abstract deadline: submit real metadata, title, abstract, authors, subject areas, and conflicts.
- Paper deadline: upload anonymous PDF, reproducibility checklist, supplement, and OpenReview fields.
- Phase 1 risk check: ensure the paper can be understood quickly and does not look checklist-thin.
- Review release: identify whether the paper is in Phase 2 and triage reviews, including AI review
  if present.
- Rebuttal: draft a compact, no-URL, no-new-results response using only submitted evidence.
- Decision: archive reviews, rebuttal, decision, and final submitted version.
- Acceptance: submit source files, copyright, camera-ready PDF, registration, presentation plan, and
  public artifacts.

## Operating rules

- Keep a single checklist for page limit, anonymity, supplement integrity, author limit, and
  multiple-submission policy.
- Run a fresh anonymity audit after every PDF or ZIP export.
- Verify ZIP files open and reproduce expected paths before submission.
- Do not leave core evidence to rebuttal.

## Backward-planning table

Because AAAI runs a two-phase review with hard OpenReview cutoffs and no second feedback round, the
timeline is unforgiving. Anchor each gate to the prior one and to the official date, not a guess.

| Gate | Depends on | Slip consequence |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Abstract deadline | title, authors, conflicts locked | cannot submit the paper |
| Paper deadline | anonymous PDF, checklist, supplement | summary reject or no entry |
| Phase-1 cut | clarity and checklist done early | no feedback, paper dies |
| Feedback round | submitted evidence only | wasted on new-results bans |
| Camera-ready | acceptance, copyright, registration | dropped from proceedings |

## Phase-1 readiness gate

Treat the Phase-1 cut as the real deadline, earlier than acceptance. Before the paper deadline, a
non-specialist colleague should be able to state your contribution, find the evidence, and confirm
the checklist matches the paper. If they cannot, the broad-AI reviewer will not either.

## Worked vignette

A team plans to "finish experiments in rebuttal." The workflow flags this as fatal: AAAI bars new
results at feedback and may cut the paper in Phase 1 before feedback exists. The critical path moves
to locking evidence and the checklist a week before the paper deadline, leaving the feedback window
only for clarifying already-submitted material.

## Output format

```text
[Current stage] idea / experiments / writing / submission / Phase 1 / rebuttal / accepted
[Next official deadline] 
[Critical path] 
[Risk register] 
[Owner map]  person or role>
```

## Source & license

This open-source skill is cataloged on AgentStack and links to its original source — we do not rehost the code.

- **Author:** [brycewang-stanford](https://github.com/brycewang-stanford)
- **Source:** [brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills](https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills)
- **License:** MIT
- **Homepage:** https://www.copaper.ai

Install and usage instructions live in the source repository linked above.

## Pricing

- **Free** — Free

## Security capabilities

Automated source analysis of v0.1.0 — what this tool can access:

- **Network access:** no
- **Filesystem access:** no
- **Shell / process execution:** no
- **Environment & secrets:** no
- **Dynamic code execution:** no

*"Yes" means the capability is present in the source — more access means more to trust, not that it is unsafe.*


## Versions

- **0.1.0** — security scan: passed — Imported from the upstream source.

## Links

- Listing page: https://agentstack.voostack.com/l/skill-brycewang-stanford-awesome-journal-skills-aaai-workflow
- Seller: https://agentstack.voostack.com/s/brycewang-stanford
- Browse the marketplace: https://agentstack.voostack.com/browse

---
Listed on AgentStack — the marketplace for AI agent skills and MCP servers. Every listing is security-reviewed. Creators keep 70%.
