Skill UI

A detailed guide for authors writing the Related Work section of an Automated Software Engineering (ASE) paper. It teaches the crucial 'delta argument' methodology, emphasizing that positioning must be against prior automated tools, covering multiple SE literature lanes, and conducting fair, head-to-head empirical comparisons to clearly delineate the novelty of the proposed work.

A comprehensive guide for researchers submitting to ASE (Automated Software Engineering). It details mandatory requirements for ensuring research reproducibility, covering the Data Availability Statement, providing anonymized and runnable tools, pinning system provenance (commits, versions, SHAs), and managing cached LLM outputs. Essential for passing rigorous peer review.

A comprehensive audit guide for submitting research papers to IEEE/ACM ASE conferences. It covers strict formatting rules (acmart template, page budget), mandatory Data Availability Statements, double-anonymous review compliance, and critical submission pitfalls like identity leaks and template errors. Use this checklist before uploading to HotCRP to maximize acceptance chances.

This guide outlines the critical rules for structuring technical research papers submitted to top-tier conferences like ASE. It emphasizes the 'decision-criticality' rule, instructing authors on how to separate core arguments (which must fit within the 10-page body) from reproduction details, raw logs, and supplementary material (the artifact). Mastering this separation is crucial for ensuring reviewers judge the paper on its merits, not its supplementary data.

Provides comprehensive guidance for researchers deciding the optimal conference venue for Software Engineering (SE) research. It distinguishes between contributions that focus on *automation* (techniques or tools that automate SE tasks) suitable for ASE, versus those that are broad empirical findings, theoretical results, or pure ML advances, directing them to venues like ICSE, FSE, or ISSTA.

A comprehensive, step-by-step guide for researchers planning and executing a submission to the ASE (Automated Software Engineering) conference. Covers the entire academic lifecycle, from initial topic selection and evidence gathering (reproducibility) to abstract registration, double-anonymous submission, navigating the early-rejection gate, rebuttal, criteria-bound revision, and final camera-ready artifact submission.

Provides comprehensive guidelines for structuring and writing academic papers for Automated Software Engineering (ASE) conferences. It teaches authors how to present an automated task, emphasize the automation design over the deep learning model, provide evidence from real subjects, and adhere to strict formatting and argument presentation rules to maximize acceptance chances.

A comprehensive guide for authors preparing an artifact appendix (ae.tex) for major conferences like ASPLOS. Learn how to structure your submission to achieve Available, Functional, and Reproducible badges. Covers managing complex dependencies (hardware, software, data), structuring the repository for evaluators, and optimizing collaboration protocols to ensure successful post-acceptance validation.

This guide details best practices for ensuring scientific rigor and reproducibility in complex system research. It outlines the necessity of capturing the full execution state—including hardware steppings, BIOS revisions, kernel configurations, toolchain versions, and dataset provenance—to prevent data decay and validate findings against environmental drift.

A comprehensive audit guide for the final pre-upload stage of major academic conference submissions (e.g., ASPLOS). This tool ensures compliance across critical areas, including strict 11-page limits, mandatory LaTeX templates, correct full-name citation formatting, hyperlinked DOIs, double-blind anonymity, and accurate HotCRP form completion.

This guide provides comprehensive strategies for drafting and revising highly technical academic papers for top-tier conferences like ASPLOS. It focuses on structuring the core argument around cross-layer insights, ensuring claims are quantifiable and bounded, and optimizing the entire manuscript to survive rapid peer review and strict page limitations.

This guide helps researchers structure and articulate the core theoretical contribution of their academic manuscripts, particularly for high-standard journals like ASQ. It teaches the critical difference between simply reporting findings and making a fundamental theoretical advancement. Learn how to frame contributions using mechanisms, reframing, boundary conditions, and integration, optimizing your Introduction and Discussion sections to maximize impact.