aer-referee-simlisted

# AER Referee Simulation ## Overview Most papers submitted to AER are rejected; the realistic acceptance rate is 6-8 percent, and a large share never reach referees. The cheapest referee report is the one generated **before** submission — but only if it is as harsh as the real one. The failure mode of self-review (human or AI) is leniency: reviewing the paper one hopes was written instead of the one on the page. This skill runs the AER editorial process against the draft: a ten-minute desk screen, then three referee reports written from distinct, adversarial priors, then an editor's synthesis with a calibrated verdict and a prioritized revise list. The simulation has one rule that overrides all others: > **The simulated reviewers' job is to reject the paper. Every comment must > survive the question "would this withstand the authors' best rebuttal?" — > but praise requires the same evidence as criticism.** ## When to Use - A complete draft exists (body, exhibits, bibliography) and `aer-consistency` reports all-pass - Before every submission and resubmission - After a real rejection, to test whether the revision would survive the same reports - When coauthors disagree about whether the paper is ready Do not use on a half-draft — the simulation will correctly report that the paper is incomplete, which wastes the run. And do not let it replace `aer-consistency`: typo-hunting referees are wasted referees. ## Stage 1 — The Desk Screen Simulate the editor's first pass: