Agent Skills
› brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills
› review-of-economic-dynamics
review-of-economic-dynamics
GitHub用于评估量化宏观动态经济学论文是否适合投稿至《Review of Economic Dynamics》期刊。提供定位分析、内容重构建议、方法论与证据标准审查，以及拒稿风险预警和替代期刊推荐，辅助作者优化稿件以符合该刊对动态均衡模型及结构计量的严格要求。
Trigger Scenarios
作者指定RED或SED期刊为目标投稿 venue
量化宏观论文需重构为动态均衡贡献而非简化形式回归
需要评估RED的桌拒风险并获取替代期刊列表
Install
npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill review-of-economic-dynamics -g -y
SKILL.md
Frontmatter
{
"name": "review-of-economic-dynamics",
"description": "Use when targeting Review of Economic Dynamics (RED) or deciding whether a quantitative-macro \/ dynamic-economics manuscript fits this venue. Encodes the journal's fit, framing, method-and-evidence bar, house style, official-submission re-check, and desk-reject heuristics."
}
Review of Economic Dynamics (review-of-economic-dynamics)
Journal positioning
RED is the journal of the Society for Economic Dynamics (the SED), the leading outlet for quantitative dynamic macroeconomics. It rewards papers that take a dynamic equilibrium model seriously — solving it, calibrating or estimating it against data, and using it to answer a substantive macro or dynamic question. The readership is quantitative macroeconomists who care about heterogeneous agents, dynamic general equilibrium, and the mapping between model and data, so a paper must combine a real economic question with disciplined computational or structural execution.
This skill is a fit / venue-selection / re-framing tool. It does not replace the journal's current official submission guidelines. Before submitting, re-check the live author instructions on the SED / Elsevier site and the editorial submission system.
When to trigger
- The author names RED (or the SED outlet) as the target venue.
- A quantitative-macro paper with a structural/computational model needs a home narrower than the top-5 but above generic field outlets.
- An applied-macro paper needs re-framing so the contribution reads as a dynamic-equilibrium insight, not a reduced-form regression.
- The author needs RED's desk-reject risks and a credible quantitative-macro alternative list.
Scope & topic fit
- Heterogeneous-agent macro (incomplete markets, wealth/earnings inequality, consumption-savings, HANK-style models).
- Dynamic general equilibrium applied to growth, business cycles, labor-market dynamics, fiscal/monetary policy, and life-cycle questions.
- Structural and computational models where solving the model is central to the contribution.
- Quantitative theory: a model disciplined by data, used to measure mechanisms or evaluate counterfactual policy.
Method & evidence bar
- The model must be solved and disciplined credibly: calibration to documented moments, structural estimation, or both, with the identification of key parameters made transparent.
- Computational method matters — solution algorithm, state space, and accuracy should be defensible, and quantitative results should be robust to reasonable alternatives.
- Counterfactuals and welfare/policy statements must follow from the model's structure, not be asserted.
- Reduced-form evidence is welcome as discipline or motivation, but the contribution is the dynamic-equilibrium mechanism, not the regression.
Structure & house style
- The introduction states the dynamic question, the model class, the quantitative mechanism, and the headline number early, and says why the equilibrium structure is necessary to answer it.
- Separate the modeling contribution from the calibration/estimation strategy from the quantitative finding.
- RED uses an unstructured abstract and JEL codes; an online appendix carries computational detail, robustness, and derivations.
- Exhibits should report economically interpretable magnitudes (decompositions, counterfactual gaps, welfare numbers), not only fit statistics.
Official-submission checklist
- Before giving submission-ready advice, read
../../resources/source-basis.mdand../../resources/official-source-map.md; start from the official source anchors for this journal family, then cite the current journal-specific page you checked. - Search the live site for "Review of Economic Dynamics submission guidelines / guide for authors" and follow the current SED/Elsevier version.
- Re-check submission fee or SED-membership-related policy, formatting, abstract/JEL requirements, and anonymization expectations on the submission system.
- Re-check the current data and code / replication-material deposit policy and computational-artifact expectations.
- If the live official instructions conflict with this skill, the official instructions win.
Pre-submission self-check
- One sentence stating why a quantitative macroeconomist should care about this mechanism.
- The contribution is stated as a dynamic-equilibrium mechanism / measurement, not as statistical significance.
- The introduction positions the paper against the current heterogeneous-agent / DGE frontier on this question.
- Solution method, calibration/estimation, and parameter identification are transparent and robust.
- Replication code and computational appendix are ready for the official deposit.
Common desk-reject triggers
- A reduced-form macro paper with no structural or dynamic-equilibrium model.
- A model solved but not disciplined by data (no calibration target or estimation).
- A computational paper where the algorithm is a black box and accuracy is unaddressed.
- Counterfactuals or welfare claims that do not follow from the stated model.
Re-routing decision
- General-interest macro at the top-5 →
american-economic-reviewor the relevant AEA outlet; broad macro theory/measurement →journal-of-monetary-economics. - Long-run growth and development dynamics →
journal-of-economic-growth; monetary/financial-macro →journal-of-money-credit-and-banking. - Broad European general-economics framing →
journal-of-the-european-economic-associationoreuropean-economic-review; pure dynamic theory →journal-of-economic-theory.
Output format
[Fit] High / Medium / Low (one-line reason)
[Target] Review of Economic Dynamics
[Topic tags] <2–3 closest topics>
[Method/evidence] <does the model + quantitative discipline clear RED's bar?>
[Top risk] <the single most likely reason for rejection>
[Official items to re-check] <submission system / fee / JEL / replication code / appendix>
[Re-route suggestion] <if not a fit, a better-matched venue>
Version History
- 1839142 Current 2026-07-05 13:11
