iclr-supplementary — independently scanned and version-tracked by SaferSkills.
SaferSkills independently audited iclr-supplementary (Agent Skill) and scored it 100/100 (green). The audit ran 55 deterministic rules across Security, Supply Chain, Maintenance, Transparency, and Community; it found 0 high-severity and 0 lower-severity findings. The full rule-by-rule trace and per-finding evidence are below. Free, methodology-open.
Findings & checks · 0 flagged
Every scanned point with the score it earned and what moved between them.
First recorded scan — no prior version to compare against.
The primary manifest — the file an agent reads to learn what this artifact does.
Use this when deciding what belongs in the main PDF, appendix, supplementary files, or private discussion-period links. The goal is to make extra evidence easy to find without hiding the paper's core argument outside the main text.
model cards, dataset cards, and ethics details in the appendix.
cleanly in the PDF.
headers that identify the team.
or private OpenReview-visible links permitted by the current guide.
reproducibility substitute.
ICLR's single-track format means the main PDF carries the argument and appendices come after references with generous room. The risk is burying decisive evidence where a time-pressed reviewer never looks, while padding the appendix with material that proves nothing.
| Content | Belongs in | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Central claim and its key result | Main text | Reviewers may not open the appendix |
| Full proof / extended derivation | Appendix | Needed for rigor, not for the headline |
| Hyperparameters, model/dataset cards | Appendix | Reference material, not argument |
| Code, logs, large tables, checkpoints | Supplementary ZIP | Too big or interactive for the PDF |
| Decisive ablation a claim depends on | Main text | Moving it weakens the narrative |
A generative-model paper hides its only fairness-of-comparison ablation in Appendix G, so a reviewer concludes the headline gain is unsupported. The fix: promote a compact version into the main text near the claim, leave the full grid in the appendix, and add an appendix map. During discussion the authors upload a revision and label the changelog so the relocation is obvious.
[Supplement plan] PDF appendix / ZIP / anonymous repo / private link / no supplement
[Main-text dependencies] <claims that must move back into main text>
[Reviewer navigation] <appendix map and file names>
[Anonymity risks] <paths, metadata, links, licenses>
[Discussion update note] <short changelog if revised>~30 seconds. Free. No account. Every finding cites a rule and a line of evidence.