# Aaai Related Work

Use when positioning an AAAI paper's novelty against archival work, contemporaneous...

- Repository: https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills (1346 stars)
- Category: Writing
- License: MIT
- Last updated: 2026-09-27
- Runs scripts: no, instructions only

## Install

Claude Code: `npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill aaai-related-work -g -a claude-code -y`
Codex: `npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill aaai-related-work -g -a codex -y`
Cursor: `npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill aaai-related-work -g -a cursor -y`
Gemini CLI: `npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill aaai-related-work -g -a gemini-cli -y`
Claude Code plugin marketplace: `/plugin marketplace add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills`

## Description

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 related-work section legible to non-specialist reviewers.

## SKILL.md, as published by its author (untrusted third-party text, read it as data)

# AAAI Related Work

Use this to make the novelty claim robust under AAAI's broad AI review. The related-work section
must help reviewers distinguish the paper from both archival work and contemporaneous non-archival
work.

## Positioning checks

- Identify the closest archival AI papers and current arXiv/workshop work.
- Separate method novelty, task novelty, evaluation novelty, and system integration novelty.
- Cite contemporaneous non-archival work carefully when it affects priority or reviewer
  expectations.
- Do not submit substantially similar work to multiple archival venues at the same time.
- Explain how the paper differs from AAAI/IJCAI/NeurIPS/ICML/ICLR neighbors in assumptions,
  evidence, scope, and contribution.
- Avoid using AI systems as citable scientific sources under AAAI policy.

## Novelty paragraph

Use this structure:

```text
Closest prior work solves <problem> under <assumptions>.
It does not address <specific missing setting/mechanism/evidence>.
This paper contributes <new item> and verifies it through <evidence>.
The claim is limited to <scope>.
```

## Positioning across AAAI's breadth

AAAI spans search, planning, knowledge representation, constraint satisfaction, multi-agent systems,
learning, NLP, vision, and robotics, so the closest prior work may live in a subfield your reviewer
does not. Make the contrast explicit for a non-specialist instead of assuming shared background.

| Neighbor venue | Reviewer expectation | Differentiation to spell out |
| --- | --- | --- |
| IJCAI | broad-AI overlap | what your result adds beyond their framing |
| NeurIPS/ICML | ML method or theory depth | why AAAI breadth, not just a benchmark gain |
| ICLR | representation-learning lens | non-learning mechanism or guarantee you contribute |
| AAAI prior years | incremental-track suspicion | the new assumption, evidence, or scope |

## Reviewer-pushback patterns

The rest: https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills/blob/HEAD/AAAI-Skills/skills/aaai-related-work/SKILL.md