resubmit-pipeline

Files (1)

• SKILL.md

SKILL.md (first lines)

# Resubmit Pipeline: Text-Only Microedit Mode

> **Before each reviewer slot**, follow [Selectable Reviewers](../shared-references/reviewer-backends.md):
> resolve invocation → `.aris/reviewer.json` → Claude Code default (Codex MCP)
> with `reviewer_route.py` through the canonical helper resolver, preserving this
> slot's tier, fresh contexts, source/image inputs and deterministic gates.
> Codex examples/pins below apply only to `backend=codex`; other routes use their
> own first-call/reply contract. Save the route and actual returned identity;
> unavailable selections are `REVIEW_UNAVAILABLE`. Classify acceptance from actual
> families/completion/scope. Forward invocation reviewer/model/effort overrides
> to reviewer-bearing children. Generation workers are unchanged.


Compose a polished paper into a new venue under text-only constraints: **$ARGUMENTS**

## Why This Exists

Most ARIS writing workflows assume the input is either a narrative report (Workflow 3) or an in-progress paper that may still need experiments / bib changes / structural edits. Resubmit is a fundamentally different scope:

- The paper is **already polished** — proofs are done, experiments are done, bibliography is curated.
- The user wants to absorb prior reviewer concerns from a previous venue and re-submit, **without** introducing new experiments, new citations, or framework changes (LLM hallucination paranoia + tight resubmit timing + closed compute budget).
- The base submission directory is **read-only** — the new submission must compose into a sibling directory, never mutate prior state.
- Page limit may shrink between source and target venue (e.g., workshop camera-ready → 9-page main).

Existing skills cover adjacent territory but none of this exact composition: `/rebuttal` builds the OpenReview-style response document, not in-paper microedits; `/auto-paper-improvement-loop` is the per-round engine but presupposes someone has already chosen the base manuscript, migrated venue format, set the edit whitelist, queued the reviewer feedback, and decided what NOT to change. `/resubmit-pipeline` fills that orchestration gap.

## When to Use

- A theory or system paper was rejected at venue A and you want to resubmit to venue B with tight time budget (≤ 1-2 weeks).
- You have **3 inputs ready**: the polished paper directory at venue A's format, the target venue B's format/template/style files, and the prior reviewer reports.
- You explicitly do **not** want to re-derive theorems, run new experiments, or change the bibliography.

## When NOT to Use

- The paper still needs experiments — use `/experiment-bridge` → `/auto-review-loop` first.
- The paper still needs structural rewrites or new sections — use `/paper-writing` (Workflow 3).
- You want to write the rebuttal response itself — use `/rebuttal` (Workflow 4).
- The reviewer feedback demands new theorems or new framework — escalate to user before starting; this skill emits `BLOCKED` with `reason_code: out_of_scope_microedit` if it detects this case.

## Constants

- **REVIEWER_MODEL** = inherits from `/auto-paper-improvement-loop`'s default (`gpt-6-astra` via Codex MCP) unless the user passes `— reviewer-model: gpt-5.4` (legacy) or another model valid for the selected backend. For `backend=codex`, reasoning effort is fixed at `xhigh` for all reviewer calls per the existing skill convention.
- **ROUNDS** = 2 (default; matches `/auto-paper-improvement-loop`'s diminishing-returns line). A 3rd round only fires if Phase 2 reports non-convergence AND the user explicitly approves at the round-2 checkpoint.
- **EFFORT** = `max` (default for resubmit; resubmit is high-stakes). The user can override with `— effort: balanced` if time is extremely tight.
- **EDIT_WHITELIST_PATH** = `<paper-base-dir>/../<NewVenue>/.aris/edit_whitelist.yaml` (auto-generated in Phase 0; user can override with a custom path).
- **NEVER_OVERWRITE** = true (always; this is a hard contract — prior submission directories are immutable).
- **ASSURANCE_LEVEL** = `submission` (default; resubmit always targets a real submission).

## Inputs

Three mandatory inputs:

1. **`paper-base-dir`** — the polished paper at venue A's format. Must contain `main.tex` (or equivalent entry), `sec/` or `sections/`, `references.bib` (or equivalent), and a compiled `main.pdf` (used for visual review).
2. **`— target-venue: <name>`** — one of: `iclr`, `icml`, `neurips`, `aaai`, `ijcai`, `colm`, `tmlr`, `uai`, or `other`. The skill expects venue style files at `<paper-base-dir>/templates/<venue>.{sty,tex,bst}` or in a recognized template directory. If `other`, the user passes `— target-style-dir: <path>`.
3. **`— review-corpus: <path>`** — directory containing prior venue's reviewer reports as `.txt` or `.md` files (one per reviewer, ideally). If `--review-corpus` is omitted, the skill emits `BLOCKED` with `reason_code: missing_review_corpus` because the whole point of resubmit is absorbing those concerns.

Optional:

- **`— reviewer-model: gpt-5.4`** — override the default reviewer (`gpt-6-astra`); use this for legacy reproducibility or to consume the older quota tier.
- **`— rounds: <int>`** — override default 2.
- **`— assurance: draft`** — relax MANDATORY gates (default `submission`).
- **`— effort: balanced`** — relax `max` if time is critical.
- **`— skip-anonymity-scan`** — skip Phase 0.5 anonymity check (only valid for non-double-blind venues like TMLR; else WARN).
- **`— overleaf-target: <project-id>`** — the Overleaf project ID for Phase 4 push (per `/overleaf-sync setup`).

## Pipeline

### Phase 0: Physical Isolation Setup (zero edits to existing files)

Resubmit's hardest invariant: **never overwrite any prior submission directory**. The new venue's submission lives as a **sibling** of all prior venues.

```bash
# Resolve target-venue → new sibling dir name (capitalized)
NEW_VENUE_DIR="$(dirname "$PAPER_BASE_DIR")/$(echo "$TARGET_VENUE" | sed 's/.*/\u&/')"

# Atomic dir create — `mkdir` (not `mkdir -p`) fails fast if the dir exists,
# avoiding the TOCTOU race window of `[ -e ] && exit; mkdir -p`. The mkdir
# itself must succeed exactly once; if a concurrent run gets there first,
# this errors out per resubmit-pipeline's never-overwrite invariant.
mkdir "$NEW_VENUE_DIR" 2>/dev/null || {
    echo "ERROR: $NEW_VENUE_DIR already exists; resubmit-pipeline never overwrites prior submissions. Pick a different target-venue or rename the existing dir." >&2
    exit 1
}
mkdir -p "$NEW_VENUE_DIR/.aris"
```

**Composition rules** (all `cp`, never `\input{../...}`, never symlink):

1. **`main.tex`** — write fresh for the target venue's `.sty`. Use `templates/<venue>.tex` as the starting skeleton; only the `\title{}`, `\author{}`, abstract include, and section input lines are copied from the base venue's `main.tex`. The new `main.tex` lives entirely inside `$NEW_VENUE_DIR/`.
2. **`sec/` (or `sections/`)** — physical `cp -r $PAPER_BASE_DIR/sec/ $NEW_VENUE_DIR/sec/`. **Do not symlink, do not `\input{../sec/...}` from the new main.** Symlinks break Overleaf zip export; cross-directory `\input` would mutate the shared pool and pollute prior submissions.
3. **`math_commands.tex`** (and any other macro file the sections depend on) — physical `cp` into `$NEW_VENUE_DIR/`.
4. **`Figure/` (or `figures/`)** — copy the directory in (`cp -r`). **Path trap**: existing sections likely write `\includegraphics{Figure/foo.pdf}`. If you set `\graphicspath{{../Figure/}}` from a child directory, it resolves `../Figure/Figure/foo.pdf` — wrong. Either copy `Figure/` in directly (preferred), or use `\graphicspath{{../}}`.
5. **Bibliography** — write `\bibliographystyle{<venue-bst>}` + `\bibliography{../references}` directly in the new `main.tex`. **Never** `\input` an existing `ref.tex` or `references.tex` that already contains its own `\bibliography{}` command (path resolution silently breaks).
6. **`.aris/`** — create `$NEW_VENUE_DIR/.aris/` and write `assurance.txt` containing `submission` (matches the verifier's expected location).

**Output of Phase 0**: a new sibling dir with all source files, no edits to text content yet, ready for compile.

### Phase 0.5: Health Check + Anonymity Scan (still zero text edits)

Before any audit or edit, the paper must compile cleanly on the new venue's style and pass anonymity scan if the target venue is double-blind.

**Compile + page count**:

```bash
cd "$NEW_VENUE_DIR"
latexmk -C
latexmk -pdf -interaction=nonstopmode -halt-on-error main.tex 2>&1 | tee compile.log
```

If compile fails: emit `RESUBMIT_REPORT.json` with `verdict: BLOCKED, reason_code: phase_0_5_compile_failed`, surface the error to the user, and stop. Common causes: missing macro from `math_commands.tex`, venue style undefined command, `\graphicspath` issue.

Page count vs venue limit (measure first; do not assume):

```bash
PAGES=$(pdfinfo main.pdf | awk '/^Pages:/ {print $2}')
LIMIT=$(grep -oE "page_limit: [0-9]+" "$NEW_VENUE_DIR/templates/$TARGET_VENUE.tex" | awk '{print $2}')
echo "Pages: $PAGES, Limit: $LIMIT, Delta: $((PAGES - LIMIT))"
```

From wanshuiyin/Auto-claude-code-research-in-sleep, MIT.

More from wanshuiyin/Auto-claude-code-research-in-sleep