メニュー
このリポジトリの skills
SkillsMP は brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills から 3,969 件の skill を収集しています。skill を開くとソースと詳細を確認できます。
brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills収集済み skill 3,969 件中 40 件を表示しています。
Use when deciding whether and how computation appears in a FOCS (IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science) paper — a venue that accepts on theorems with no evaluation section expected — covering machine-verified case analyses, computer-discovered…
原文の言語: 英語
Use when building the related-work and citation apparatus of a FOCS (IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science) paper — tracing result lineages across the FOCS/STOC record, citing arXiv/ECCC full versions with version pins, handling concurrent…
原文の言語: 英語
Use when hardening a FOCS (IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science) paper's checkability — the theory analogue of reproducibility — via hypothesis ledgers, single-source theorem statements that cannot drift between submission and arXiv versions,…
原文の言語: 英語
Use when reasoning about how a FOCS (IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science) submission is evaluated — the TCMF-sponsored program committee, subreferee delegation, double-blind norms the venue adopted years before STOC, the summer decision arc, and…
原文の言語: 英語
Use when running the final pre-upload audit of a FOCS (IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science) submission — the April HotCRP deadline clock, the abstract-references-plus-ten-pages attention rule, the 11-point single-column format floor, PDF…
原文の言語: 英語
Use when architecting everything after page ten of a FOCS (IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science) submission — a venue with no separate supplement channel where the paper itself continues past the guaranteed-read window — covering body…
原文の言語: 英語
Use when deciding whether a theoretical-computer-science result belongs at FOCS (IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science) — testing foundations-level significance, weighing the April deadline against sibling theory venues like STOC, SODA, CCC, ITCS,…
原文の言語: 英語
Use when planning a FOCS (IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science) cycle end to end — working backward from the April 1 deadline, managing the live post-submission summer of the 2026 cycle, coordinating with the STOC beat, preparing the November…
原文の言語: 英語
Use when drafting or revising a FOCS (IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science) paper — making the first ten pages carry the whole case to a broad theory committee, pairing informal and formal theorem statements, keeping single-column 11-point prose…
原文の言語: 英語
Use when packaging an artifact for an accepted OOPSLA paper under the SPLASH artifact-evaluation track — surviving the kick-the-tires phase, earning the Functional and Reusable badges, depositing a Zenodo snapshot with a DOI for Available, and aligning…
原文の言語: 英語
Use when writing an OOPSLA author response inside the short per-round window — reading reviews through the four-outcome lens (Accept, Minor Revision, Major Revision, Reject), steering borderline papers toward a revision outcome instead of rejection, and…
原文の言語: 英語
Use when converting an accepted OOPSLA paper into its PACMPL journal article — final acmsmall formatting within the 25-page revision cap, de-anonymization and Data-Availability Statement updates, ACM open-access and rights steps, hitting the OOPSLA1 (April)…
原文の言語: 英語
Use when designing or auditing the evaluation of an OOPSLA paper — matching evidence type to claim type across the venue's spread (benchmarks, corpus studies, case studies, user studies, mechanized proofs), building baselines and workloads that survive the…
原文の言語: 英語
Use when building an OOPSLA related-work section — positioning against the PACMPL family (POPL, PLDI, ICFP, OOPSLA itself) plus ECOOP, Onward!, and SE venues, citing journal-era OOPSLA papers in PACMPL volume/issue form, verifying every venue attribution on…
原文の言語: 英語
Use when hardening an OOPSLA paper's empirical claims to the SIGPLAN Empirical Evaluation Guidelines — managed-runtime measurement discipline, warmup and variance reporting, corpus and benchmark provenance, environment pinning, and a Data-Availability…
原文の言語: 英語
Use when explaining or strategizing around OOPSLA's two-round review machinery — double-anonymous multi-stage reviewing, the four outcomes (Accept, Minor Revision, Major Revision, Reject), reviewer continuity across rounds, round-hopping a Major Revision, and…
原文の言語: 英語
Use when preparing or auditing an OOPSLA submission — picking between the two yearly PACMPL rounds, meeting the 23-page acmsmall anonymous format, writing the required Data-Availability Statement, clearing double-anonymous and concurrent-submission checks,…
原文の言語: 英語
Use when deciding what rides along with an OOPSLA submission beyond the 23-page body — appendices, full proofs or mechanizations, extended tables, anonymized code — keeping the package double-anonymous, self-consistent with the PDF, and honest about what…
原文の言語: 英語
Use when judging whether a project is OOPSLA-shaped — a PL contribution whose evidence spans design, implementation, formalism, or empirical study — and routing within the SIGPLAN family from OOPSLA's seat: POPL for theory-first, PLDI for…
原文の言語: 英語
Use when planning an OOPSLA campaign on the two-round clock — choosing October vs March entry, budgeting for Minor or Major Revision paths, mapping acceptance to the OOPSLA1 or OOPSLA2 PACMPL issue, scheduling artifact evaluation, and landing the SPLASH talk,…
原文の言語: 英語
Use when revising a draft into OOPSLA's register — design insight stated before the artifact, claims written to be falsifiable, motivating examples that carry semantics, journal-article pacing inside the 23-page cap, and honest threats-to-validity prose that…
原文の言語: 英語
Use when packaging a POPL artifact — above all a mechanized proof development in Rocq/Coq, Lean, Agda, or Isabelle — for the post-conditional-acceptance evaluation, satisfying the no-admit/no-sorry completeness rule, mapping paper theorems to proof files,…
原文の言語: 英語
Use when drafting a POPL author response during the optional multi-day window — triaging soundness objections against misread definitions, answering "what does Theorem 3 actually assume" questions with pointers rather than new material, staying concise per…
原文の言語: 英語
Use when a POPL paper is conditionally accepted — planning the mandatory revision the Review Committee must approve, de-anonymizing for PACMPL Issue POPL, handling ORCID/open-access/APC steps on the ACM side, syncing the paper with its proof artifact, and…
原文の言語: 英語
Use when designing the empirical component of a POPL paper — deciding whether evidence should be a mechanization, a prototype, case studies, or benchmarks; reporting proof effort and case-study coverage honestly; and keeping performance numbers in a…
原文の言語: 英語
Use when positioning a POPL paper in the semantics, type-systems, and verification literature — stating per-line technical deltas against the nearest formal systems, covering the PACMPL family and LICS/CAV/CPP/TOPLAS neighbors, citing PACMPL-era papers in…
原文の言語: 英語
Use when making a POPL paper's results independently checkable — deciding which theorems to mechanize versus hand-prove, maintaining a paper-to-proof correspondence table from day one, keeping on-paper proofs auditable with explicit assumption tracking, and…
原文の言語: 英語
Use when interpreting where a POPL submission stands — the full double-blind pipeline from the July HotCRP deadline through reviews, the optional author response, October conditional-acceptance decisions, the mandatory revision gate, Distinguished Paper…
原文の言語: 英語
Use when preparing a POPL submission for the single July HotCRP deadline — auditing the 25-pages-of-text acmsmall cap, summary-rejection format rules, full double-blind hygiene for theory papers with public proof repositories, dual-submission exposure, and…
原文の言語: 英語
Use when splitting a POPL paper across the 25-page body, the proof appendix, and anonymous supplementary material — deciding which proofs and auxiliary judgments leave the text, packaging proof scripts without identity leaks under full double-blind, and…
原文の言語: 英語
Use when deciding whether a project is POPL-shaped — a principle about programming languages carried by definitions and theorems — or better aimed at PLDI's implementation bar, OOPSLA's breadth, ICFP's paradigm focus, or LICS, CAV, CPP, ESOP, and journal…
原文の言語: 英語
Use when planning a POPL campaign calendar — backward-scheduling theory and mechanization from the July deadline, riding the October notification into the conditional-acceptance revision and artifact evaluation, landing the January conference, and retargeting…
原文の言語: 英語
Use when drafting or revising POPL prose — building the informal-to-formal ramp from a motivating program to definitions to a sharply stated main theorem, keeping notation coherent across 25 pages of text, writing proof sketches that name the hard case, and…
原文の言語: 英語
Use when deciding how code, computations, or data attach to a SODA (ACM-SIAM Symposium on Discrete Algorithms) paper — SODA itself runs no artifact track, so this skill covers computer-assisted proof evidence, implementation companions, and when to route the…
原文の言語: 英語
Use when drafting the SODA (ACM-SIAM Symposium on Discrete Algorithms) rebuttal — the roughly three-day window between review release in early September and the response deadline, triaging referee misreadings versus real gaps, and writing terse…
原文の言語: 英語
Use when converting a SODA (ACM-SIAM Symposium on Discrete Algorithms) acceptance into a correct SIAM proceedings entry — following the October final-version instructions, condensing the no-limit submission into the proceedings version, restoring author…
原文の言語: 英語
Use when deciding whether and how experiments belong in a SODA (ACM-SIAM Symposium on Discrete Algorithms) paper — SODA's scope includes experimental validation but theorems carry the decision, so this skill designs supporting numerics honestly and routes…
原文の言語: 英語
Use when positioning a SODA (ACM-SIAM Symposium on Discrete Algorithms) paper in the algorithms literature — tracing bound lineages across SODA/STOC/FOCS/ESA/ICALP and journals, handling arXiv-first priority culture, citing conference versus journal versions…
原文の言語: 英語
Use when hardening the verifiability of a SODA (ACM-SIAM Symposium on Discrete Algorithms) paper, where reproducibility means checkable mathematics — complete proofs in the submitted full version, stable statement-proof correspondence, explicit constants and…
原文の言語: 英語
Use when reasoning about how a SODA (ACM-SIAM Symposium on Discrete Algorithms) submission is evaluated — the per-edition program committee under joint ACM-SIAM sponsorship, HotCRP triage of a record-size submission pool, lightweight double-blind refereeing…
原文の言語: 英語