Skill UI

This skill acts as a comprehensive router for Information Systems Research (ISR) manuscripts. It guides users through the entire academic writing lifecycle, from initial topic selection and theory development to method application, drafting, and rebuttal. It ensures the manuscript adheres to the sociotechnical and intradisciplinary standards required by top-tier IS journals, helping authors identify the next logical step.

A comprehensive guide detailing the required structure and evidence for packaging research artifacts for academic evaluation tracks (e.g., ISSTA). It outlines how to achieve specific ACM badges—Available, Functional, Reusable, and Results Reproduced—by ensuring the tool is containerizable, has a clear entry point, and allows key results to be independently regenerated by reviewers.

This guide provides comprehensive guidelines for designing, conducting, and auditing empirical studies in software engineering. It emphasizes achieving scientific rigor by matching every claim to specific, measured evidence, ensuring fair baselining (equal budget), and applying appropriate advanced statistics (non-parametric tests, effect sizes). Essential reading for researchers submitting papers based on performance evaluations.

A guide for authors submitting research in software testing and analysis. It teaches how to structure the related work section to clearly demonstrate novelty and technical positioning. Authors must frame their contribution using a 'delta-first' approach, explicitly stating what the nearest existing technique lacks and how their work fills that gap, while also being vigilant about venue attribution and overlapping prior work.

This guide helps researchers determine the optimal conference or journal venue for their software engineering contribution. It specifically addresses whether the core of the work is a testing or analysis technique evaluated on real subjects (ISSTA), or if it fits better within broader Software Engineering (ICSE/FSE), formal verification (PLDI/CAV), or applied domains.

A guide for authors submitting to theoretical computer science venues (ITCS). It strictly defines what constitutes valid evidence for a mathematical claim, emphasizing that complete proofs are paramount. The guidelines detail how to use worked examples, separating objects, and appropriately scoped computations, while strongly advising against using empirical benchmarks or performance metrics.

A comprehensive guide for authors preparing submissions for the ITCS conference. It details the required format, the two-step submission deadlines (abstract vs. full paper), and critical steps for ensuring the manuscript is fully self-defending, correctly anonymized, and meets the standards for a lightweight, double-blind review process.

This guide details the crucial rules for structuring a scientific paper submitted to conferences like ITCS. It dictates how content—including main theorems, proofs, and motivation—must be distributed across three locations: the main body, the submitted appendix, and the external full version (arXiv). The core principle ensures that all decision-critical evidence for accepting the paper resides within the submitted PDF, preventing reviewers from relying on external or unread preprints.

This guide helps researchers navigate the complex landscape of theoretical computer science conferences. It explains the crucial distinction between 'conceptual novelty' (favored by ITCS) and 'deep technical results' (favored by STOC/FOCS). Use this to determine if your research contribution is a new idea, model, or connection, or if it is the deepest, most polished theorem on an established problem.

A comprehensive guide detailing the entire academic life cycle for submitting to ITCS. It outlines the critical single annual cycle—from abstract submission in early September through review, notification, and final conference presentation in January. Learn how to plan backward from the deadline, especially focusing on strategies for the no-rebuttal format, ensuring your paper preemptively answers reviewer objections.

This guide provides comprehensive style guidelines for submitting articles to the Journal of the American Academy of Religion (JAAR). It specifically instructs authors on converting traditional footnote-based citations to the required in-text author-date system. Key areas covered include formatting the alphabetized, year-keyed reference list, handling primary-source texts, and adhering to house conventions like italicizing foreign words.

This comprehensive guide outlines the strategic approach for authors revising an academic article following a 'revise-and-resubmit' (R&R) decision. It teaches how to synthesize conflicting feedback from diverse reviewers (e.g., textual scholars, theorists, ethnographers), ensuring every comment is addressed point-by-point. The goal is to strengthen the argument while protecting the core field significance and maintaining scholarly anonymity.