메뉴
当你为《电子学报》(Acta Electronica Sinica, AES) 稿件设计与呈现实验/仿真时使用。覆盖电子/信息/信号处理/通信类工作的实验目标与假设、数据集与仿真设置、基线与对比公平性、评价指标(SNR/BER/误差/准确率/资源占用)、消融与参数敏感性、统计显著性与多次运行、图表呈现规范、以及硬件/FPGA/测量实验的条件报告。帮助作者用严谨、可复现、对比公平的实验证据支撑创新点，抵御《电子学报》外审专家对"实验不充分、对比不公平、结果偶然"的质疑。
Codex 또는 Claude로 설치 이 Prompt를 복사해 Codex, Claude 또는 다른 어시스턴트에 붙여 넣으면 Skill 페이지를 검토하고 설치를 진행할 수 있습니다.
SOC 직업 분류 기준
Use when preparing the accountability artifacts that accompany an ACM FAccT paper — datasheets for datasets, model cards, data statements, audit and impact-assessment documentation, and released code/data — since FAccT's culture centers documentation and accountability infrastructure rather than a formal ACM artifact-badging track; covers what makes each genre credible, anonymized-review versus public-release versions, and consistency with the paper's harm claims.
Use when drafting ACM FAccT author responses — the short factual-correction rebuttal after preliminary reviews, and, distinctively for the 2026-new process, the Revise-and-resubmit round where you address Area-Chair-prioritized concerns from a mixed CS+law+social-science panel, map each to a concrete change, and survive a re-review while keeping mutual anonymity.
Use when preparing an accepted ACM FAccT paper for camera-ready — de-anonymizing and adding the withheld Positionality/Acknowledgements statements, switching to the acmart sigconf proceedings format, ACM metadata (DOI, ORCID, CCS concepts, rights), the two-round camera-ready calendar for Accept vs Revise papers, ACM Open Access, finalizing datasheets/model cards, and integrating required changes without scope creep.
Use when designing or auditing ACM FAccT empirical work — quantitative fairness audits with disaggregated metrics and fair baselines, qualitative and participatory studies with coding and reflexivity, mixed-methods designs, sound handling of protected attributes and proxies, consent and IRB for human-subjects and community-facing work, and matching evidence to the shape of a fairness/accountability/transparency claim.
Use when positioning an ACM FAccT submission across its many disciplinary lanes — algorithmic fairness/ML, HCI, law and policy, STS and critical theory, and prior FAccT/FAT* proceedings — writing delta-first contrast that a mixed reviewer pool will accept, citing borrowed constructs to their real origin, keeping self-citations mutually anonymous, and declaring overlap with workshops, preprints, and prior versions.
Use when strengthening ACM FAccT transparency and reproducibility — releasing code, data, and analysis for quantitative audits; documenting datasets and models with datasheets, model cards, and data statements; making qualitative and participatory work auditable without breaking confidentiality; pinning provenance for scraped and model-generated data; and keeping the paper, the supplementary material, and any released artifact consistent.
| name | aes-experiments |
| description | 当你为《电子学报》(Acta Electronica Sinica, AES) 稿件设计与呈现实验/仿真时使用。覆盖电子/信息/信号处理/通信类工作的实验目标与假设、数据集与仿真设置、基线与对比公平性、评价指标(SNR/BER/误差/准确率/资源占用)、消融与参数敏感性、统计显著性与多次运行、图表呈现规范、以及硬件/FPGA/测量实验的条件报告。帮助作者用严谨、可复现、对比公平的实验证据支撑创新点，抵御《电子学报》外审专家对"实验不充分、对比不公平、结果偶然"的质疑。 |
实验章节是《电子学报》(Acta Electronica Sinica, AES) 外审专家判断创新点"是否真的成立"的法庭。 本刊由中国电子学会 (Chinese Institute of Electronics) 主办，审稿人对电子信息类实验方法学要求高， 实验不充分、对比不公平、只报一次最好结果是最常见的退修与退稿理由。本技能帮你把实验设计成 能直接、公平、可复现地证明每一个创新点。以下为通行方法学；本刊对实验呈现的具体格式标 待核实 （核验日 2026-07-09，官网 ejournal.org.cn）。
原则：每个贡献都要有一个实验直接回答"它成立吗、它比谁好、好多少、为什么"。 这是 Acta / Electronica / Sinica 稿件让审稿人信服的核心。
| 公平性要点 | 做法 |
|---|---|
| 基线选择 | 覆盖经典方法 + 最新最强竞争方法 |
| 超参数公平 | 对比方法也调优或用其原文最佳设置，并说明 |
| 同口径 | 相同数据、相同指标、相同评测协议 |
| 计算成本对齐 | 报告参数量/复杂度/运行时间，避免只比精度不比代价 |
| 复现来源 | 注明基线结果是复现还是引用原文 |
aes-reproducibility）。aes-writing-style）。把审稿人可能提的质疑提前想到并在实验里堵上，比修回时补救省力得多：
| 可能质疑 | 预先反制 |
|---|---|
| "对比方法太弱" | 纳入最新最强基线并公平调参 |
| "只在一个数据集上有效" | 多数据集/多工况验证泛化 |
| "提升可能来自偶然" | 多次运行 + 统计检验 + 误差条 |
| "复杂度换来的提升不值" | 报告参数量/时延/功耗做代价对齐 |
| "缺少对关键组件的验证" | 补消融实验隔离贡献 |
| "参数是精心挑的" | 敏感性分析展示鲁棒区间 |
【《电子学报》(AES) 实验充分性审计】
贡献—实验映射：<每条贡献均有验证 / 贡献 K 缺实验>
数据/仿真：<完整 / 缺划分或参数>
对比公平：<公平 / 基线弱或超参不公>
指标：<精度+代价兼顾 / 只报精度>
统计：<多次+误差条+检验 / 单次最优 需补>
消融/敏感性：<齐备 / 缺>
图表：<规范有解读 / 需改>
待核实：<本刊实验格式细则>
风险：<外审"实验不充分/不公平"概率：低/中/高>
一套目标清晰、对比公平、统计严谨、可复现的实验，是创新点在《电子学报》(Acta Electronica Sinica, AES) 外审中真正立得住、经得起追问的决定性证据。