From mathfin-skills
Guides users through the Mathematical Finance (Wiley) single-blind review process, editor screening, referee expectations, and desk-screen failure patterns for theory papers.
How this skill is triggered — by the user, by Claude, or both
Slash command
/mathfin-skills:mathfin-review-processThe summary Claude sees in its skill listing — used to decide when to auto-load this skill
- Before submission, to understand the editor and referee lens
The accessible Wiley author-guideline text identifies single-blind peer review: the editor screens submissions, suitable papers may be assigned to an Associate Editor, outside referees may be consulted, and the Associate Editor prepares a recommendation. The current Wiley product-page metadata checked on 2026-06-20 lists Rama Cont as editor; reopen the live product or editorial-board page before naming the editor in advice to an author.
In rough order, before any detailed proof verification:
Order your own pre-submission read-through the same way.
Refereeing at proof-checking journals is slow and variable because arguments are verified, not skimmed; months of quiet carry little signal. Avoid folklore about average handling times — confirm any expectations against the journal's current author guidelines or recent author experience. A status query is reasonable after an extended wait; route it through the editorial office.
Prepare a compact packet before submission:
This packet is not submitted verbatim; it is a discipline check. If you cannot write it, the paper is not ready for the single-blind editor/AE/referee chain.
Major revision on a theory paper usually means the mathematics is salvageable but at least one proof needs real work; minor revision means exposition and bookkeeping. A reject-with- encouragement signal often points at the novelty axis rather than correctness — treat it as a repositioning task before any re-proof. These labels are not standardized across editors, so read the AE's summary paragraph, not the label.
[Stage] editor screen / AE / referee / decision
[Main risk] novelty / rigor / fit / exposition
[Action] ...
[Next step] mathfin-submission or mathfin-rebuttal
npx claudepluginhub brycewang-stanford/awesome-journal-skills --plugin mathfin-skillsAssesses whether a quantitative finance manuscript fits Mathematical Finance, covering scope, method-and-evidence bar, house style, and desk-reject risks.
Interprets the Review of Finance editorial process: desk screening, double-blind review, top-three-journal referee standards, two-round philosophy, Fast-Track timing, and sanctions for undisclosed resubmission.
Routes through the Mathematical Finance manuscript pipeline from problem selection to submission, including theorem-first stages and revision. Use when orienting a financial-mathematics paper or unsure which stage is the bottleneck.