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 packaging code, data, and models for a WACV paper, covering the anonymous review artifact versus the public post-acceptance release, reproducing constraint-based applications claims (latency, power, robustness) not just accuracy, dataset licensing…
Use when responding to WACV reviews, covering the optional one-page Round 1 rebuttal and, separately, the Revise-and-Resubmit change summary that carries a revised paper into the no-rebuttal Round 2, including how to triage three reviews for the area chair,…
Use when preparing a WACV camera-ready after acceptance, covering de-anonymization, IEEE Xplore plus CVF open-access dual publication, IEEE copyright and PDF checks, the dataset and code release obligation, per-paper registration, and preparing the…
Use when designing or auditing WACV experiments, covering Applications-track systems evidence (latency, power, robustness under real constraints) versus Algorithms-track matched-baseline novelty, comparative assessment under the deployed condition,…
Use when writing or auditing a WACV related-work section, covering how to position an applications or algorithms contribution against fast-moving vision literature, sibling-venue (CVPR/ICCV/ECCV) and arXiv concurrency, application-domain literature,…
Use when strengthening the reproducibility of a WACV paper, covering the recipe ledger for constraint-aware systems, benchmark and split hygiene, seed and session honesty, device and power reporting for applications claims, and keeping the reproduction…
Use when reasoning about how WACV decides a paper, covering the two-round model, the Round 1 Accept / Revise-and-Resubmit / Reject recommendations, the optional Round 1 rebuttal, the no-rebuttal Round 2, area-chair consolidation, double-blind confidentiality,…
Use when auditing a WACV submission before an OpenReview round deadline, covering the Round 1 vs Round 2 choice, the Applications vs Algorithms track field, the 8-page-including-figures limit, double-blind anonymity and OpenReview-profile requirements, the…
Use when organizing WACV supplementary material, covering what belongs in the anonymized supplement versus the 8-page body, packaging qualitative videos and extra results without breaking double-blind, keeping the supplement consistent with the paper across…
Use when deciding whether a project belongs at WACV or should route elsewhere, covering WACV's applications-first identity within the CVF's CVPR/ICCV/ECCV/WACV calendar, the Applications-vs-Algorithms track choice, whether the two-round winter timing fits…
Use when planning a WACV campaign calendar across the two-round model, from track and round choice through the Round 1 submission, rebuttal, and Accept/Revise-and-Resubmit/Reject decision, into the Round 2 revision and decision, camera-ready, and the winter…
Use when revising a WACV paper's prose and first page, covering how to write for the chosen Applications or Algorithms track, leading with the real-world constraint or the method, self-contained figure captions inside the 8-page-including-figures budget,…
Use when packaging code, models, datasets, or media as ACM MM (ACM Multimedia) artifacts — building the anonymous review package versus the public release, and choosing between the Open Source Software Competition, the Dataset track, the Reproducibility…
Use when drafting the ACM MM (ACM Multimedia) rebuttal — turning multiple anonymous reviews into one focused, anonymous response that fixes factual errors first, adds small confirmatory cross-modal results, concedes calibratedly, and stays inside policy…
Use when preparing the ACM MM (ACM Multimedia) camera-ready version of record — de-anonymizing safely, completing the ACM rights form and CCS concepts, meeting ACM sigconf requirements, releasing code/data/media artifacts and any earned reproducibility badge,…
Use when designing or auditing the experiments of an ACM MM (ACM Multimedia) paper — matched baselines per modality, ablations that isolate the cross-modal fusion, user studies or QoE measurement where the claim is subjective, dataset and media licensing, and…
Use when building or auditing the related-work section of an ACM MM (ACM Multimedia) paper — covering the multimedia literature spread across vision, audio/speech, language, HCI/QoE, and systems, handling arXiv-speed concurrency, keeping citations…
Use when strengthening the reproducibility of an ACM MM (ACM Multimedia) paper or preparing for the ACM MM Reproducibility track and ACM artifact badging — capturing environments, media/data access, seeds, and multimodal pipelines so an independent reviewer…
Use when reasoning about the ACM MM (ACM Multimedia) review pipeline — thematic-area routing to reviewers and area chairs, the OpenReview double-blind process and its single-blind track exceptions, the optional anonymous rebuttal, the meta-review and…
Use when auditing an ACM MM (ACM Multimedia) submission for OpenReview readiness — thematic-area choice, the 6-8 page ACM sigconf budget, references-only overflow, double-blind anonymity versus the single-blind Reproducibility/Open-Source/Dataset tracks,…
Use when organizing the ACM MM (ACM Multimedia) supplementary material due after the paper deadline — deciding what belongs in the 6-8 page body versus the supplement, packaging video/audio/interactive demos that render on a reviewer's machine, keeping all…
Use when deciding whether a project is a genuine ACM MM (ACM Multimedia) contribution rather than single-modality work, choosing a thematic area, and routing between ACM MM, CVPR/ICCV, ACL/EMNLP, ICMR, MMSys, NeurIPS/ICLR, and the ACM TOMM journal by finding…
Use when planning the end-to-end ACM MM (ACM Multimedia) campaign calendar — from thematic-area scoping and track choice, through the April OpenReview abstract/paper/supplement chain, the June anonymous rebuttal, the July decision, the August camera-ready,…
Use when revising an ACM MM (ACM Multimedia) paper for house style — putting the cross-modal contribution on the first page, framing media (figures, video, audio) as evidence rather than decoration, making the fusion the visible claim, and compressing the…
Use when packaging an HPCA artifact for the voluntary post-acceptance evaluation on the separate AE HotCRP: scoping reproducibility tiers, preparing simulator- and silicon-heavy workflows for cold-start evaluators, budgeting their wall-clock time, and earning…
Use when drafting an HPCA rebuttal and revision in the single combined window: triaging objections by what the window can fix, running a small number of new experiments, writing for the program-committee room and its champion, and revising the paper…
Use when preparing an HPCA camera-ready: inverting every blinding action, applying the IEEE template and rights forms, restoring acknowledgments and the AI-use disclosure, integrating reproducibility badges and DOIs, and preparing the February/March talk in…
Use when auditing an HPCA evaluation: declaring the fidelity contract (simulator, configuration, workloads, sampled regions, validation), matching each claim to its instrument, capturing real-silicon machine state, tuning baselines honestly, and reporting…
Use when building an HPCA related-work section: sweeping the HPCA/ISCA/MICRO/ASPLOS record on dblp and IEEE Xplore, writing lineage paragraphs with structural deltas, blinding self-citations without touching the bibliography, and honoring the rule that every…
Use when strengthening HPCA reproducibility: pinning the result chain from simulator commit through config, workload, sampled region, and statistics, building one manifest per figure, recording machine state for silicon runs, and keeping the environment…
Use when reasoning about the HPCA review pipeline: the double-blind process, what a single combined rebuttal/revision window means, champion dynamics at the program-committee meeting, how to read each outcome, and how confidentiality and the preprint policy…
Use when auditing an HPCA submission for the two-step July gate on HotCRP, the 11-page main-body limit, the IEEE template, double-blind anonymity plus the all-authors reference rule, the AI-use disclosure, artifact-link scrubbing, and final-week sequencing…
Use when deciding where HPCA material belongs across the four destinations the venue offers — the 11-page body, the anonymized artifact mirror, the staging shelf for the rebuttal/revision window, and the post-acceptance public release — while keeping…
Use when deciding whether a project is HPCA-shaped or better routed to ISCA, MICRO, ASPLOS, or a systems/theory venue, weighing whether the machine, the mechanism, or the measurement is the contribution, and whether the main track or the HPCA Industry track…
Use when planning an HPCA project timeline from venue fit through the two-step July registration and paper gate, the autumn review wait, the single rebuttal/revision window, notification, IEEE camera-ready, artifact evaluation, and the February/March talk,…
Use when revising an HPCA paper for the mechanism-to-behavior first-page arc, a measured motivation before the fix, a checkable mechanism description, numbers that name their instrument, and 11-page compression that leaves slack for the single…
Use when packaging ICASSP code, data, audio or image samples, model checkpoints, scoring scripts, seeds, and logs, even though ICASSP has no formal artifact badge. Covers what signal-processing reviewers actually open, how single-blind review lets artifacts…
Use when drafting an ICASSP rebuttal or author response to reviews, covering the recently added and short author-response window, the single-blind setting where reviewers already know you, answering signal-processing reviewers from the four-page record…
Use when preparing an accepted ICASSP paper for IEEE Xplore publication, covering the final 4+1 PDF, IEEE PDF eXpress validation, the IEEE electronic copyright form, integrating reviewer-requested fixes without changing the accepted claim, registration and…
Use when designing or auditing ICASSP experiments across signal-processing modalities — matching the metric to the task law (WER, SI-SDR, PESQ/STOI, EER/minDCF, PSNR/SSIM, BER, RMSE), anchoring baselines to current strong methods and standard corpora,…