GEB Workflow Router (geb-workflow)
Overview
This is the router. It does not replace any specialized skill. It tells you which geb- skill to use at the current stage* of a manuscript aimed at Games and Economic Behavior (GEB).
Default assumption: unless the user says otherwise, treat the target as GEB — the leading specialist game-theory journal, published by Elsevier and an official journal of the Game Theory Society (founded 1989 by Ehud Kalai; chief editor Hervé Moulin since 2021). GEB judges work on whether it advances the frontiers of game theory and its applications — theory, mechanism design, behavioral, and experiments — not general-economics interest alone. Its process is distinctive: the chief editor assigns each paper to one of seven Editors (your publicly known "Editor in Charge"), who routes it to an anonymous Advisory Editor and anonymous referees. About one-third of submissions are desk-rejected and only ~15% are eventually published. Re-verify volatile specifics (chief editor, the seven Editors, abstract cap, fees) on the official Guide for Authors; several are marked 待核实 in the source map.
When to trigger
- The user asks "what should I do next?"
- The user hands over a draft and needs the current bottleneck diagnosed
- Work is ping-ponging between theory, experiment, writing, and response letters
- A GEB decision letter arrived and the user needs to switch into revision mode
Routing table
| Current symptom |
Next skill |
| Result feels incremental / unclear it advances game theory itself |
geb-topic-selection |
| Relation to the game-theory literature is fuzzy or undersold |
geb-literature-positioning |
| The "so what for game theory" sentence is missing |
geb-contribution-framing |
| Proofs are opaque, or assumptions/generality are under-examined |
geb-identification-strategy |
| Experimental data / numerical examples need analysis or are under-powered |
geb-data-analysis |
| Game trees, payoff matrices, or result tables are unclear |
geb-tables-figures |
| Prose buries the model; abstract is over 250 words |
geb-writing-style |
| Need a data/code-sharing plan (encouraged, not required at GEB) |
geb-replication-and-data-policy |
| Want to understand the Editor-in-Charge review path before submitting |
geb-review-process |
| Ready to submit via Editorial Manager; need a preflight + cover letter |
geb-submission |
| Received an R&R; need a response-letter strategy |
geb-rebuttal |
Default order
geb-topic-selection — confirm the result advances game theory itself
geb-literature-positioning — locate it against the game-theory frontier
geb-contribution-framing — state the one-sentence contribution to the field
geb-identification-strategy — assumptions, results, proof exposition, generality
geb-data-analysis — experimental analysis / verified numerical examples
geb-tables-figures — game trees, payoff matrices, clean result exhibits
geb-writing-style — land the model for a general game-theory reader (abstract ≤250 words)
geb-replication-and-data-policy — optional but recommended sharing plan
geb-review-process — understand the Editor-in-Charge path
geb-submission — Editorial Manager preflight + conference-version cover letter
geb-rebuttal — after the R&R
geb-writing-style is a late-stage polish. Do not rewrite the introduction before the theorems and assumptions are settled — the statements will change.
Stage log
Keep this log with the manuscript and update it after each working pass; the first unresolved line is your route:
GEB stage log (✓ = settled, ? = open — first ? wins)
contribution one-line advance to game theory written out verbatim ..... [?]
positioning nearest frontier papers named + what you generalize ...... [?]
results theorems stated, assumptions listed, proofs readable ..... [?]
evidence experiment powered / numerical examples verified ......... [?]
exhibits game trees and payoff matrices self-contained ............ [?]
prose abstract ≤250 words; model reachable within intro ........ [?]
sharing data/code plan drafted (encouraged, not required) ........ [?]
process Editor-in-Charge path + desk-reject risks reviewed ....... [?]
submit Editorial Manager preflight; conference version flagged .. [?]
--- decision letter in hand? ignore every line above → geb-rebuttal ---
- "Is this big enough for GEB?" →
geb-topic-selection
- "Who am I building on / generalizing?" →
geb-literature-positioning
- "My proof is correct but unreadable" →
geb-identification-strategy
- "My experiment may be under-powered" →
geb-data-analysis
- "My abstract is 320 words" →
geb-writing-style
- "There's a conference version of this paper" →
geb-submission
- "Who actually decides on my paper?" →
geb-review-process
- "I got a revise-and-resubmit" →
geb-rebuttal
Anti-patterns
- Do not skip
geb-contribution-framing and submit a technically-correct result with no stated advance to game theory — desk-reject risk
- Do not polish exhibits while the main theorem's assumptions are still moving
- Do not treat GEB like a general-economics top-5: the bar is advancing game theory, not broad policy interest
- Do not let
geb-rebuttal draft a response letter before the revised manuscript exists
1---2name: geb-workflow3description: Use when deciding which geb-* sub-skill to invoke next, or when sequencing manuscript work from topic selection through rebuttal for a Games and Economic Behavior (GEB) submission. Routes — it does not replace — the specialized skills.4---56# GEB Workflow Router (geb-workflow)78## Overview910This is the router. It does not replace any specialized skill. It tells you **which geb-* skill to use at the current stage** of a manuscript aimed at *Games and Economic Behavior* (GEB).1112Default assumption: unless the user says otherwise, treat the target as GEB — the leading specialist **game-theory** journal, published by Elsevier and an official journal of the **Game Theory Society** (founded 1989 by Ehud Kalai; chief editor Hervé Moulin since 2021). GEB judges work on whether it **advances the frontiers of game theory and its applications** — theory, mechanism design, behavioral, and experiments — not general-economics interest alone. Its process is distinctive: the chief editor assigns each paper to one of **seven Editors** (your publicly known "Editor in Charge"), who routes it to an **anonymous Advisory Editor** and anonymous referees. About **one-third of submissions are desk-rejected** and only **~15%** are eventually published. Re-verify volatile specifics (chief editor, the seven Editors, abstract cap, fees) on the official Guide for Authors; several are marked 待核实 in the source map.1314## When to trigger1516- The user asks "what should I do next?"17- The user hands over a draft and needs the current bottleneck diagnosed18- Work is ping-ponging between theory, experiment, writing, and response letters19- A GEB decision letter arrived and the user needs to switch into revision mode2021## Routing table2223| Current symptom | Next skill |24|--------------------------------------------------------------------------|-------------------------------------|25| Result feels incremental / unclear it advances game theory itself | `geb-topic-selection` |26| Relation to the game-theory literature is fuzzy or undersold | `geb-literature-positioning` |27| The "so what for game theory" sentence is missing | `geb-contribution-framing` |28| Proofs are opaque, or assumptions/generality are under-examined | `geb-identification-strategy` |29| Experimental data / numerical examples need analysis or are under-powered| `geb-data-analysis` |30| Game trees, payoff matrices, or result tables are unclear | `geb-tables-figures` |31| Prose buries the model; abstract is over 250 words | `geb-writing-style` |32| Need a data/code-sharing plan (encouraged, not required at GEB) | `geb-replication-and-data-policy` |33| Want to understand the Editor-in-Charge review path before submitting | `geb-review-process` |34| Ready to submit via Editorial Manager; need a preflight + cover letter | `geb-submission` |35| Received an R&R; need a response-letter strategy | `geb-rebuttal` |3637## Default order38391. `geb-topic-selection` — confirm the result advances game theory itself402. `geb-literature-positioning` — locate it against the game-theory frontier413. `geb-contribution-framing` — state the one-sentence contribution to the field424. `geb-identification-strategy` — assumptions, results, proof exposition, generality435. `geb-data-analysis` — experimental analysis / verified numerical examples446. `geb-tables-figures` — game trees, payoff matrices, clean result exhibits457. `geb-writing-style` — land the model for a general game-theory reader (abstract ≤250 words)468. `geb-replication-and-data-policy` — optional but recommended sharing plan479. `geb-review-process` — understand the Editor-in-Charge path4810. `geb-submission` — Editorial Manager preflight + conference-version cover letter4911. `geb-rebuttal` — after the R&R5051> `geb-writing-style` is a late-stage polish. Do not rewrite the introduction before the theorems and assumptions are settled — the statements will change.5253## Stage log5455Keep this log with the manuscript and update it after each working pass; the **first unresolved line is your route**:5657```text58GEB stage log (✓ = settled, ? = open — first ? wins)59contribution one-line advance to game theory written out verbatim ..... [?]60positioning nearest frontier papers named + what you generalize ...... [?]61results theorems stated, assumptions listed, proofs readable ..... [?]62evidence experiment powered / numerical examples verified ......... [?]63exhibits game trees and payoff matrices self-contained ............ [?]64prose abstract ≤250 words; model reachable within intro ........ [?]65sharing data/code plan drafted (encouraged, not required) ........ [?]66process Editor-in-Charge path + desk-reject risks reviewed ....... [?]67submit Editorial Manager preflight; conference version flagged .. [?]68--- decision letter in hand? ignore every line above → geb-rebuttal ---69```7071- "Is this big enough for GEB?" → `geb-topic-selection`72- "Who am I building on / generalizing?" → `geb-literature-positioning`73- "My proof is correct but unreadable" → `geb-identification-strategy`74- "My experiment may be under-powered" → `geb-data-analysis`75- "My abstract is 320 words" → `geb-writing-style`76- "There's a conference version of this paper" → `geb-submission`77- "Who actually decides on my paper?" → `geb-review-process`78- "I got a revise-and-resubmit" → `geb-rebuttal`7980## Anti-patterns8182- **Do not** skip `geb-contribution-framing` and submit a technically-correct result with no stated advance to game theory — desk-reject risk83- **Do not** polish exhibits while the main theorem's assumptions are still moving84- **Do not** treat GEB like a general-economics top-5: the bar is advancing **game theory**, not broad policy interest85- **Do not** let `geb-rebuttal` draft a response letter before the revised manuscript exists