Menu
Skills in this repository
SkillsMP has collected 3,969 skills from brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills. Open a skill to review its source and details.
brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-SkillsShowing 40 of 3,969 collected skills.
Use when auditing an ACM CoNEXT submission for HotCRP readiness, covering the choice between the December and June cycles, the mandatory paper-registration step, the ACM acmart page budget (long ≤16 + ≤4 appendix; short ≤10 + ≤2 appendix), double-anonymous…
Use when deciding what goes in the ACM CoNEXT main body versus the appendix budget versus the artifact — splitting content by decision-criticality so nothing a reviewer needs to accept the paper hides in an appendix or repository, within the acmart limits…
Use when deciding whether a networking project belongs at ACM CoNEXT or should be routed to SIGCOMM, NSDI, IMC, SIGMETRICS, MobiCom, or HotNets, and when using CoNEXT's two-cycles-per-year calendar and PACMNET journal-style fit to choose the venue and the…
Use when planning an ACM CoNEXT campaign backward from a deadline, covering the choice between the December and June submission cycles, the mandatory registration step, the one-shot major-revision window, the reproducibility badge opt-in due at submission,…
Use when shaping the prose and structure of an ACM CoNEXT paper — leading with the networking problem and deployment context, tying every claim to a measurement on the real target platform, arguing limitations rather than reciting them, and holding the acmart…
Use when planning the reproducibility/artifact story for an ECAI paper — noting that ECAI/FAIA has NO ACM/IEEE-style artifact-badging committee, so credibility is carried by the paper and its supplement and judged by the same reviewers, and adapting an…
Use when writing the ECAI author response (rebuttal) — the single, short, double-blind reply during the response window (IJCAI-ECAI 2026: 7-10 April 2026) that must correct factual misreadings and supply asked-for evidence within a strict length limit,…
Use when preparing the ECAI camera-ready — de-anonymizing, fitting the final version into the page budget, and meeting the publisher's production requirements, which differ by regime: IOS Press FAIA (ecai.cls, open-access book volume,…
Use when designing or auditing the evidence in an ECAI paper — choosing proof versus experiment by claim shape across ECAI's breadth (theory/KR, planning/search, ML, multi-agent, applied), fair baselines, seeds and spread, honest ablations, and provenance,…
Use when writing the ECAI related-work section — covering the relevant general-AI lanes (symbolic, learning, multi-agent, application) for a broad reviewer pool, writing delta-first positioning, keeping self-citations double-blind, and doing it within a tight…
Use when building the reproducibility story for an ECAI paper — a complete proof appendix for theory/KR work, a seeded and cached package for empirical/ML work, provenance pinning for datasets and models, and an anonymized supplement that satisfies…
Use when reasoning about how an ECAI submission is evaluated — double-blind review, the summary-reject first phase, area chairs / senior PC, the single author-response (rebuttal) window, an accept/reject decision (no journal-style major-revision round), and…
Use when auditing an ECAI submission for readiness — the abstract-then-full-paper two-deadline flow, the tight 7-page body budget, double-blind anonymity, the correct template/publisher regime (ecai.cls/FAIA for a standalone ECAI vs ijcai.sty/IJCAI…
Use when deciding what goes in the ECAI 7-page body versus the anonymized supplement — splitting content by decision-criticality so nothing a reviewer needs to judge the paper lives outside the tight body, given there is no unlimited in-paper appendix and no…
Use before writing to decide whether a project belongs at ECAI versus IJCAI, AAAI, AAMAS, KR, or a pure-ML venue, and whether it should go to the ECAI main track or the co-located PAIS applications track — using contribution shape, the model-swap test, the…
Use to plan an ECAI campaign end to end — run the single-round year backward from the paper deadline through the abstract/registration step, summary-reject phase, rebuttal window, notification, and the open-access camera-ready, adapting to whether the edition…
Use when writing or tightening an ECAI paper body — leading with a general-AI contribution on the first page, matching evidence to claim (a theorem and construction, or a fair empirical comparison), and doing it inside a 7-page body where every paragraph must…
Use when packaging an IEEE ICSME artifact for the Joint Artifact Evaluation Track and ROSE Festival, covering the IEEE "Open Research Object" and "Research Object Reviewed" badges, what evaluators check first, DOI-issuing archives, evaluator-proof…
Use when drafting an IEEE ICSME author response during the double-anonymous author-response period, covering the early-decision cut that decides whether you respond at all, answering the PC's specific "Response Recommended" questions with existing evidence,…
Use when preparing an accepted IEEE ICSME paper for its IEEE Xplore camera-ready, covering de-anonymization, the IEEEtran two-column format and page budget, the IEEE eCopyright form, integrating the reviewer-required and author-response changes without scope…
Use when designing or auditing IEEE ICSME empirical evaluations, covering real evolving subject systems, mining-software-repositories provenance, fair baselines, SE-standard statistics and effect sizes, change-history and survivorship confounds, qualitative…
Use when positioning an IEEE ICSME submission against the software-maintenance and evolution literature across ICSME, SANER, MSR, ICPC, SCAM, ICSE/FSE, and the SE journals (TSE, EMSE), writing delta-first contrast rather than a citation catalog, keeping…
Use when strengthening IEEE ICSME reproducibility and open-science evidence, covering the data-availability statement, anonymized-but-runnable artifacts, mining and LLM provenance pinning, claim-to-evidence mapping, honest degrees of reproducibility, and…
Use when reasoning about how an IEEE ICSME research submission is evaluated, covering double-anonymous review, the early-decision cut that issues Accept/Reject before the rebuttal, the "Response Recommended" author-response period, the single-round…
Use when auditing an IEEE ICSME research-track submission for EasyChair readiness, covering the abstract-then-paper two-step deadline, the IEEEtran two-column 10+2 page budget, double-anonymous review, the open-science data-availability expectation, and…
Use when deciding what belongs in an IEEE ICSME paper body versus its anonymized artifact and appendices, covering the IEEEtran two-column 10-page budget where figures and appendices count, the rule that decision-critical evidence stays inside the reviewed…
Use when deciding whether a software-engineering project belongs at IEEE ICSME (maintenance, evolution, reverse engineering, program comprehension, technical debt, refactoring, mining software repositories) or should be routed to ICSE, FSE, ASE, ISSTA, MSR,…
Use when planning an IEEE ICSME project timeline from venue and track choice through abstract registration, paper submission, the early-decision cut and author-response rebuttal, notification, IEEE Xplore camera-ready, the ROSE-Festival artifact evaluation,…
Use when revising an IEEE ICSME paper for a maintenance/evolution contribution stated on the first page, research-question contracts, a threats-to-validity section that argues rather than recites, evidence proportional to the claim, double-anonymous wording,…
Use when preparing an ACM IMC artifact for release, covering the artifact-availability declaration, post-acceptance availability shepherding, DOI-issuing dataset archives, documenting measurement provenance and vantage points, Community Contribution Award…
Use when drafting ACM IMC author responses, covering the initial-review rebuttal and — distinctively — the One-Shot-Revision resubmission that must address a bounded set of action points, keep double-blind anonymity, satisfy the reviewer champion, and be…
Use when preparing an accepted ACM IMC paper for the proceedings, covering systematic de-anonymization, finalizing the Ethics and artifact-availability statements, permanentizing dataset and code links to DOI-issuing archives, satisfying the availability…
Use when designing or auditing ACM IMC measurements, covering representative vantage points, honest ground truth, longitudinal design for a moving Internet, safe and ethical active measurement, coverage-bias quantification, provenance pinning, and matching…
Use when writing or auditing the related-work and positioning of an ACM IMC paper, covering the measurement literature lanes, positioning against prior datasets and vantage points, delta-first framing, citing the datasets and tools you build on,…
Use when strengthening ACM IMC reproducibility and availability evidence, covering the artifact-availability declaration, measurement provenance (vantage points, dates, tool versions), dataset release with schema, honest reproducibility for a moving Internet,…
Use when reasoning about how an ACM IMC submission is evaluated, covering double-blind multi-round review, the Accept / One-Shot-Revision / Reject decision categories, the reviewer-champion rule and bounded action points, early rejection of consensus-reject…
Use when auditing an ACM IMC submission for HotCRP readiness, covering the paper-registration step, the acmart template with BBL upload, the full/short page limits, double-blind anonymity including vantage-point details, the mandatory Ethics section, the…
Use when deciding what belongs in an ACM IMC paper body versus its appendix and released artifact, covering the acmart page limits, the rule that decision-critical evidence and the Ethics discussion stay in the reviewed pages, double-blind supplementary…
Use when deciding whether an empirical networking project belongs at ACM IMC or should be routed to SIGCOMM, NSDI, CoNEXT, PAM, USENIX Security, WWW, or a journal, using the measurement-first test, the dataset/vantage-point lens, the ethics-gate check, and…
Use when planning an ACM IMC campaign end to end, covering the choice between the two annual deadlines, backward planning from the target cutoff, the registration step, the One-Shot-Revision path across deadlines, availability shepherding, the camera-ready…