Use when strengthening an AAAI paper's reproducibility checklist, experimental traceability, seed reporting, compute disclosure, dataset access, code/data readiness, and evidence map.
Scanned 6/4/2026
Install to Claude Code
npx -y skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill aaai-reproducibility --agent claude-codeInstalls into .claude/skills of the current project.
Are you the author of Aaai Reproducibility?
Add the live security badge to your README — it updates automatically with every re-scan.
[](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/brycewang-stanford-aaai-reproducibility)More formats (shields.io, HTML) on the badges page.
---
name: aaai-reproducibility
description: Use when strengthening an AAAI paper's reproducibility checklist, experimental traceability, seed reporting, compute disclosure, dataset access, code/data readiness, and evidence map.
---
# AAAI Reproducibility
Use this when a draft needs to survive AAAI review on rigor, not just novelty. AAAI-26 required a
reproducibility checklist after references, so the checklist must agree with the paper and
supplement rather than read as an afterthought.
## Reproducibility audit
- Map each central claim to submitted evidence: theorem, table, figure, ablation, appendix item,
checklist answer, or code/data artifact.
- Record seeds, splits, preprocessing, hyperparameters, model selection, early stopping, prompt
selection, and hardware.
- Report variance or uncertainty when stochasticity affects conclusions.
- Document dataset licenses, access constraints, sensitive data, human-subjects issues, and
annotation procedures.
- Separate training compute, inference compute, and experiment search cost.
- Check the reproducibility checklist for contradictions with the main text and supplement.
## Common AAAI weaknesses
- Checklist says code/data are available but supplement lacks runnable commands.
- Main results rely on one seed, one benchmark, or one prompt family.
- Baselines are weaker than current open-source or widely cited systems.
- Evaluation uses closed data or APIs with no reproducibility substitute.
- Human evaluation omits annotator instructions or quality control.
## Output format
```text
[Reproducibility grade] strong / adequate / fragile / not reviewable
[Checklist conflicts] <answers that contradict paper/supplement>
[Evidence gaps] <claims without submitted verification>
[Compute/data disclosure] complete / incomplete
[Priority fixes] <smallest changes before submission>
```
Is this your skill, or is something wrong with this listing? Request removal or report an issue. Author removals are honored within 72 hours.
No comments yet. Be the first to comment!