/ccs-workflow
Use when planning an ACM CCS project timeline across the two HotCRP review cycles, from venue fit through abstract registration, full-paper upload, rebuttal, notification, revision, artifact evaluation, ACM camera-ready, and in-person presentation, with backward-planning offsets
$ npx -y skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill ccs-workflow --agent claude-codeHow it fires
How this skill gets triggered: by you, by Claude, or both.
- Fires itselfAuto-invocation. Claude auto-loads it when your prompt matches the work.Auto-invocation is when the right skill fires by itself at the right moment, driven by a FLOW.md router and a hook, instead of you invoking it by name. It is the difference between a skill being installed and a skill actually getting used.Read the full definition →
- You can call itInvoke it directly when you want it.
- Slash command
/ccs-workflow
Context preview
The summary Claude sees to decide when to auto-load this skill.
Use when planning an ACM CCS project timeline across the two HotCRP review cycles, from venue fit through abstract registration, full-paper upload, rebuttal, notification, revision, artifact evaluation, ACM camera-ready, and in-person presentation, with backward-planning offsets
SKILL.md
ccs-workflow.SKILL.mdname: ccs-workflow
description: Use when planning an ACM CCS project timeline across the two HotCRP review cycles, from venue fit through abstract registration, full-paper upload, rebuttal, notification, revision, artifact evaluation, ACM camera-ready, and in-person presentation, with backward-planning offsets and the security big-four deadline-hopping calendar.
CCS Workflow
Use this as the project-management skill for a CCS submission. CCS is a conference, not a journal: it has no editor-in-chief and no article-processing charge. The rotating leadership is the per-edition General Chairs and Program Co-Chairs (CCS 2026 Program Co-Chairs: Véronique Cortier and Zhiqiang Lin, reported 2026-07-08; verify against the organizing-committee page). Replace every date below with the current cycle's HotCRP deadlines and work backward.
The dual-deadline cycle
CCS runs two review cycles per year into one conference. A paper enters one cycle only; work rejected in the first cycle may not be resubmitted (even revised) to the second cycle of the same year. Pick the cycle from readiness, not hope — a thin first-cycle submission burns the year at this venue.
- CCS 2026 (The Hague, Netherlands, Nov 15-19, 2026) Cycle A: abstract registration Jan 7,
full paper Jan 14, rebuttal Mar 17-20, notification Apr 9, 2026 (verify).
- CCS 2026 Cycle B: abstract registration Apr 22, full paper Apr 29, rebuttal Jun 29-Jul 1,
notification Jul 17, 2026 (verify). Camera-ready reported Aug 21, 2026.
- Both 2026 deadlines have passed as of 2026-07-08; treat them as a template and read the
CCS 2027 CFP when posted (CCS 2027 host city was still under steering-committee selection).
Milestones
- Venue fit: confirm the contribution is a broad security result for the SIGSAC PC.
- Evidence lock: freeze threat model, attack/defense implementation, adaptive evaluation,
measurement validation, and the ethics/disclosure posture.
- Abstract registration: mandatory title, authors, abstract, and topics in HotCRP before the
registration deadline; no paper without a registered abstract.
- Full-paper deadline: upload the anonymized 12-page ACM sigconf PDF plus appendices.
- Rebuttal window: respond to reviews in the short author-response period.
- Notification: accept, minor revision (revise within the cycle), or reject.
- Artifact evaluation: submit artifacts after acceptance for ACM badges if you opt in.
- Camera-ready and registration: ACM proceedings version, then in-person presentation.
Backward plan from the full-paper deadline
| Weeks out (heuristic) | Attack-plus-defense milestone | |---|---| | 10+ | Threat model frozen, attack primitive working end to end | | 8 | Defense implemented; adaptive attacker designed against it | | 6 | Measurement or evaluation runs complete, environment logged | | 4 | Ethics and responsible-disclosure section drafted, disclosure initiated | | 3 | Full draft in ACM sigconf two-column format | | 2 | Internal red-team read by an adversarial-minded colleague | | 1 | Anonymity sweep, artifact-availability statement, appendix assembly | | 0 | Abstract registered, then full paper in HotCRP |
Anchor every offset to the current cycle, never to a past calendar.
Big-four deadline-hopping
CCS, IEEE S&P, USENIX Security, and NDSS run rolling multi-cycle deadlines, so a paper rejected in one can often be reworked into the next open venue within weeks. Keep a live map: a CCS Cycle A reject in April can target USENIX Security or the next NDSS cycle rather than waiting a year. Never resubmit unchanged — reviewers rotate across all four venues.
Coordination notes
- Assign one owner for the ethics/disclosure section and another for the anonymity sweep;
shared ownership is how both slip.
- Archive the exact submitted PDF and appendices, since rebuttal replies must quote them.
Output format
[Current stage] idea / building / writing / abstract / submission / rebuttal / accepted / artifact
[Cycle] A / B and next official deadline (date + source, or unknown)
[Critical path] <three tasks that determine readiness>
[Risk register] <threat-model / anonymity / ethics / evidence / artifact / presentation>
[Owner map] <task -> person or role>
Read more
name: ccs-workflow description: Use when planning an ACM CCS project timeline across the two HotCRP review cycles, from venue fit through abstract registration, full-paper upload, rebuttal, notification, revision, artifact evaluation, ACM camera-ready, and in-person presentation, with backward-planning offsets and the security big-four deadline-hopping calendar.
CCS Workflow
Use this as the project-management skill for a CCS submission. CCS is a conference, not a journal: it has no editor-in-chief and no article-processing charge. The rotating leadership is the per-edition General Chairs and Program Co-Chairs (CCS 2026 Program Co-Chairs: Véronique Cortier and Zhiqiang Lin, reported 2026-07-08; verify against the organizing-committee page). Replace every date below with the current cycle's HotCRP deadlines and work backward.
The dual-deadline cycle
CCS runs two review cycles per year into one conference. A paper enters one cycle only; work rejected in the first cycle may not be resubmitted (even revised) to the second cycle of the same year. Pick the cycle from readiness, not hope — a thin first-cycle submission burns the year at this venue.
- CCS 2026 (The Hague, Netherlands, Nov 15-19, 2026) Cycle A: abstract registration Jan 7,
full paper Jan 14, rebuttal Mar 17-20, notification Apr 9, 2026 (verify).
- CCS 2026 Cycle B: abstract registration Apr 22, full paper Apr 29, rebuttal Jun 29-Jul 1,
notification Jul 17, 2026 (verify). Camera-ready reported Aug 21, 2026.
- Both 2026 deadlines have passed as of 2026-07-08; treat them as a template and read the
CCS 2027 CFP when posted (CCS 2027 host city was still under steering-committee selection).
Milestones
- Venue fit: confirm the contribution is a broad security result for the SIGSAC PC.
- Evidence lock: freeze threat model, attack/defense implementation, adaptive evaluation,
measurement validation, and the ethics/disclosure posture.
- Abstract registration: mandatory title, authors, abstract, and topics in HotCRP before the
registration deadline; no paper without a registered abstract.
- Full-paper deadline: upload the anonymized 12-page ACM sigconf PDF plus appendices.
- Rebuttal window: respond to reviews in the short author-response period.
- Notification: accept, minor revision (revise within the cycle), or reject.
- Artifact evaluation: submit artifacts after acceptance for ACM badges if you opt in.
- Camera-ready and registration: ACM proceedings version, then in-person presentation.
Backward plan from the full-paper deadline
| Weeks out (heuristic) | Attack-plus-defense milestone | |---|---| | 10+ | Threat model frozen, attack primitive working end to end | | 8 | Defense implemented; adaptive attacker designed against it | | 6 | Measurement or evaluation runs complete, environment logged | | 4 | Ethics and responsible-disclosure section drafted, disclosure initiated | | 3 | Full draft in ACM sigconf two-column format | | 2 | Internal red-team read by an adversarial-minded colleague | | 1 | Anonymity sweep, artifact-availability statement, appendix assembly | | 0 | Abstract registered, then full paper in HotCRP |
Anchor every offset to the current cycle, never to a past calendar.
Big-four deadline-hopping
CCS, IEEE S&P, USENIX Security, and NDSS run rolling multi-cycle deadlines, so a paper rejected in one can often be reworked into the next open venue within weeks. Keep a live map: a CCS Cycle A reject in April can target USENIX Security or the next NDSS cycle rather than waiting a year. Never resubmit unchanged — reviewers rotate across all four venues.
Coordination notes
- Assign one owner for the ethics/disclosure section and another for the anonymity sweep;
shared ownership is how both slip.
- Archive the exact submitted PDF and appendices, since rebuttal replies must quote them.
Output format
[Current stage] idea / building / writing / abstract / submission / rebuttal / accepted / artifact [Cycle] A / B and next official deadline (date + source, or unknown) [Critical path] <three tasks that determine readiness> [Risk register] <threat-model / anonymity / ethics / evidence / artifact / presentation> [Owner map] <task -> person or role>
Stanford REAP × CoPaper.AI · 由斯坦福实证方法论团队精选与维护 访问 copaper.ai 微信:CoPaper.AI 按 11 个主流学科板块覆盖 经管与商科 社会科学 人文学科 数学与物理科学 生命科学 医学与健康 工程与技术 计算机科学与 AI 体育科学 点击任一学科名可跳转到对应说明;每类下的代表子领域在正文总览中完整列出。下方封面墙按 venue 导航,完整分类见覆盖一览。 🧭 布局指南 · 📚 Skill Pack 一览 · ⚡ 如何使用 · 🧪 自动实证
Other skills on awesome-journal-skills.
- /aaai-artifact-evaluation
Use when packaging AAAI code, data, multimedia appendices, technical appendices, reproducibility evidence, and post-acceptance artifact releases without violating double-blind or immutable-supplement rules.
Open skill - /aaai-author-response
Use when drafting an AAAI author response (rebuttal) under the single short character-limited author-feedback window, the no-URL rule, no-new-results guidance, AI-generated-review handling, and the AAAI two-phase review process where Phase-2 papers receive one feedback round
Open skill - /aaai-camera-ready
Use when preparing an accepted AAAI paper for camera-ready source submission to AAAI Press, including proceedings page limits, two-column template compliance, copyright transfer, purchased extra technical pages, deanonymization, registration, oral or poster presentation, and
Open skill - /aaai-experiments
Use when designing or auditing AAAI experiments for the broad-AI program committee, including baselines, ablations, statistical significance, robustness, human evaluation, AI-for-Social-Impact and alignment/safety evidence, compute and cost reporting, and
Open skill - /aaai-related-work
Use when positioning an AAAI paper's novelty against archival work, contemporaneous arXiv or workshop papers, and AAAI/IJCAI/NeurIPS/ICML/ICLR neighbors across the broad AI scope, while staying inside AAAI's dual-submission and AI-as-source policy constraints and writing a
Open skill - /aaai-reproducibility
Use when strengthening an AAAI paper's reproducibility checklist (placed after references), experimental traceability, seed and hyperparameter reporting, compute and cost disclosure, dataset access and licensing, code/data ZIP readiness, and the claim-to-evidence map that
Open skill

