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 drafting or revising COLM paper prose — leading with a finding about language models rather than a leaderboard delta, scoping claims to tested models and scales, naming versions in text, keeping the 9-page main text self-sufficient, and matching the…
Use when packaging the artifacts of a CoRL paper — code, training configs, demonstration datasets, policy checkpoints, simulation environments, and benchmark definitions — as anonymous review-time evidence and as durable public releases after acceptance, in a…
Use when drafting the CoRL rebuttal — a single-page PDF due days after reviews are released, aimed at reviewers, the Area Chair, and the discussion window that follows. Covers triage against the first-round gate, one-page layout economy, presenting new…
Use when converting an accepted CoRL paper into its final form — the 9-page camera-ready main text with the extra page for review feedback, the final-mode corl LaTeX template, appendix merged into one PDF, de-anonymization, external hosting for videos because…
Use when designing or auditing experiments for a CoRL robot-learning paper — seeds and evaluation-episode counts, task-suite breadth, real-robot versus simulation evidence, sim-to-real gap measurement, baseline fairness across BC/RL/VLA families,…
Use when positioning a CoRL paper against the literature — the robot-learning lineage across CoRL/RSS/ICRA, the ML-methods stream from NeurIPS/ICLR/ICML, the fast-moving VLA and foundation-model wave, classical robotics baselines, concurrent arXiv work, and…
Use when making a CoRL robot-learning paper reproducible — pinning simulator and driver versions, releasing training configs, demonstration data and checkpoints, documenting hardware setups that cannot be rerun, seed policy, evaluation scripts, and honest…
Use when preparing or auditing a CoRL OpenReview submission — the corl_2026 LaTeX template, the 8-page main text with a mandatory Limitations section counted inside it, uncounted references and appendix, the supplementary file and 250 MB video,…
Use when assembling CoRL supplementary material — the strongly encouraged overview video under the 250 MB cap and roughly three minutes, the optional appendix inside the same PDF that reviewers need not read, code and data attachments, and anonymization of…
Use when deciding whether a project belongs at CoRL, the Conference on Robot Learning, or should be routed to ICRA, IROS, RSS, NeurIPS, ICLR, ICML, or a journal — based on whether the learned component is the contribution, what embodied evidence exists, and…
Use when planning a CoRL submission cycle end to end — the late-May abstract and paper deadlines, the summer review window, first-round rejection risk, the August one-page rebuttal and discussion period, autumn decisions, the October PMLR camera-ready, and…
Use when writing or revising a CoRL paper's prose — leading with the embodied task and the learned component, calibrating claims to evaluation scale, writing the mandatory Limitations section as a scored asset, fitting the argument into 8 pages, and…
Use when packaging what stands behind a CSCW paper — systems, analysis pipelines, codebooks, instruments, datasets from real communities — for review-time scrutiny and post-acceptance release, where community-data ethics constrain release more than any badge…
Use when a CSCW paper draws Revise and Resubmit or Revise for External Review — triaging reviewer requests, running the weeks-long revision as a project, and writing the point-by-point response letter that the same reviewers will read before they reread…
Use when a CSCW paper is accepted and enters PACMHCI production — executing minor-change conditions, deanonymizing text and artifacts, ACM journal e-rights and TAPS steps, issue assignment, and the separate track of presenting at the next CSCW conference.
Use when designing or auditing the empirical work behind a CSCW paper — interview and ethnographic rigor, trace and log analysis, surveys, deployments, and mixed methods — matching each method's own validity standard and the ethics of studying real…
Use when positioning a CSCW paper's related work — engaging the venue's own concept lineage, the PACMHCI-era literature, neighboring HCI venues, and the social sciences CSCW borrows from, with era-correct citations and anonymity-safe self-references for…
Use when strengthening the transparency of a CSCW paper — auditable qualitative analysis trails, documented trace pipelines, codebooks and instruments, and honest data-availability statements when community and participant data cannot ethically be shared.
Use when interpreting where a CSCW paper stands in review — the PACMHCI journal model's decision vocabulary (Revise for External Review, Revise and Resubmit, Conditional Accept), same-reviewer re-review, the rolling editorial board, and what each outcome…
Use when readying a CSCW manuscript for upload — confirming the current pathway (rolling via Manuscript Central as of mid-2026), the single-column ACM template, the word-length scrutiny band, anonymization of author and community identifiers, ethics…
Use when assembling supplementary materials for a CSCW submission — appendices, codebooks, interview guides, survey instruments, analysis code, and data extracts — deciding what accompanies a journal-model paper, anonymized end to end and consistent across…
Use when deciding whether a project belongs at CSCW — is the group, community, or organization the real unit of analysis? — and running the routing decision against CHI, ICWSM, DIS, GROUP, TOCHI, and social-science journals before any drafting or platform…
Use when planning a CSCW submission timeline end to end — the PACMHCI journal model, the retired fixed cycles versus the rolling 2027+ pathway, Revise-and-Resubmit rounds that span months, and back-planning so an acceptance lands before the conference-year…
Use when drafting or revising CSCW prose — group-level framing, concepts a field can reuse, participant voice handled with care, theory that earns its keep, and length discipline under the 5,000-12,000-word scrutiny band where contribution is weighed against…
Use when packaging code, models, and audio artifacts for an INTERSPEECH paper — anonymous demo pages and sample audio during double-blind review, public release at camera-ready, checkpoint and recipe distribution, voice-data licensing and speaker-consent…
Use when INTERSPEECH reviews arrive on CMT and a rebuttal is due — triaging three-or-more speech reviewers with mixed science/engineering instincts, answering WER/MOS evidence doubts with material already in the 4-page record, keeping replies anonymous, and…
Use when an INTERSPEECH paper is accepted and the camera-ready, registration, and presentation chain begins — de-anonymizing for the ISCA Archive, restoring acknowledgments on the references page, meeting the author-registration requirement for proceedings…
Use when designing or auditing the experimental evidence for an INTERSPEECH paper — task-correct metrics (WER/CER, MOS/CMOS, EER/minDCF, PESQ/STOI), baselines reviewers accept, significance testing over utterances and seeds, condition coverage across…
Use when positioning an INTERSPEECH paper in the literature — tracing lineage through the ISCA Archive and its DOIs, covering the ICASSP/ASRU/SLT sibling circuit and challenge series, handling the speech-versus-NLP crossover canon, citing corpora properly,…
Use when hardening the reproducibility of an INTERSPEECH paper — pinning corpus versions and official splits, publishing text-normalization and scoring rules that WER/EER silently depend on, documenting MOS listening-test protocols, reporting seeds and…
Use when reasoning about how INTERSPEECH review actually works — area-based assignment inside ISCA's scientific program, multi-reviewer scoring and meta-review on CMT, what the rebuttal can and cannot move, oral/poster allocation, ISCA best student paper…
Use when auditing an INTERSPEECH submission before the CMT deadline — the strict 4-page-plus-references format, double-anonymous rules and the pre-deadline anonymity period, scientific-area and metadata choices, the post-deadline paper-update window,…
Use when deciding what accompanies an INTERSPEECH paper beyond its 4 pages — audio sample pages and multimedia for listening-based judgment, what reviewers may ignore versus must see, the references-and-acknowledgments page's strict scope, and packaging extra…
Use when deciding whether a project belongs at INTERSPEECH, the ISCA flagship speech conference, or should be routed to ICASSP, ASRU/SLT, Odyssey, SSW, ACL/EMNLP, or a speech journal — testing whether spoken language is the contribution, matching subfields to…
Use when managing an INTERSPEECH project across the annual ISCA cycle — backward-planning from the late-February deadline through the update window, spring review, June notification, camera-ready and registration coupling, and the September–October…
Use when writing or compressing an INTERSPEECH paper into its 4 content pages — the abstract-and-index-terms opening, task-first framing for a mixed science/engineering readership, table and figure economy, protocol one-liners that preserve rigor under…
Use when preparing an accepted ISCA paper's artifact for evaluation under the ACM Review and Badging policy — scoping which results are reproducible within evaluator budgets, packaging simulator-heavy workflows others can run, writing the evaluator-facing…
Use when ISCA reviews arrive and the rebuttal-plus-revision window opens — triaging objections by what a three-week window can actually fix, deciding between textual rebuttal and a revised PDF with new experiments, structuring responses that arm a champion at…
Use when converting an accepted ISCA paper into its published form — de-anonymizing authors, acknowledgments, and artifact links; satisfying the edition's publisher workflow under the alternating ACM/IEEE arrangement; integrating shepherd requirements and…
Use when designing or auditing the evaluation of an ISCA paper — pinning simulator fidelity to the claims it must carry, documenting gem5-class configurations and sampling choices, selecting workload suites that represent the claim's domain, tuning baselines…