Skill UI

This guide outlines the process for converting accepted academic research tools and data into highly polished, reproducible, and reusable packages for the ASE Artifact Evaluation track. Learn how to meet the criteria for earning 'Artifacts Available' (DOI archiving) and 'Artifacts Reusable' badges, ensuring your work is durable and accessible to the wider research community.

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 the rigorous process for packaging research artifacts for submission to major conferences like USENIX ATC. It outlines the requirements for earning three key badges—Artifacts Available, Functional, and Reproduced—ensuring that submitted work is reproducible, functional, and permanently archived according to industry best practices.

This guide outlines the comprehensive process for submitting and evaluating Computer Aided Verification (CAV) research artifacts. It details the criteria for earning three badges (Available, Functional, Reusable), the two-phase review structure (smoke-test and full review), and best practices for packaging scientific tools, including the use of containers, pinned benchmarks, resource limits, and proof witnesses. This ensures reproducibility and rigor in academic research.

This guide details the comprehensive workflow for preparing an accepted ACM CCS paper for the final proceedings. It covers critical steps including de-anonymization, applying ACM sigconf templates and rights forms, incorporating shepherd/minor-revision feedback, placing artifact evaluation badges, and coordinating publication disclosure timing. Adherence to these technical and policy checks ensures compliance with ACM standards.

This guide details how to prepare high-quality, verifiable system artifacts (code, data, hardware) for academic conferences like EuroSys. It outlines the requirements for achieving multiple evaluation badges—Available, Functional, and Reproduced—by ensuring the artifact is self-contained, portable, and verifiable by an external evaluator without prior context.

This guide details the USENIX FAST artifact evaluation process, providing systematic advice for researchers submitting system papers. It explains the requirements for earning the three USENIX badges (Available, Functional, Reproduced). Key topics include managing hardware dependencies in storage systems, packaging best practices (e.g., Docker containers, raw logs, comprehensive READMEs), and ensuring the final artifact is maximally reproducible for external evaluation.

This guide details the comprehensive process of transforming a reviewed, double-blind academic paper into a final, IEEE-published camera-ready manuscript and a conference talk. It covers crucial steps including de-anonymization, applying the official IEEE template and rights forms, integrating reproducibility badges, confirming DOIs, and structuring the presentation content for the winter slot.

This guide outlines the specific expectations for preparing the 'artifact' when submitting papers to the International Conference on Database Theory (ICDT). It clarifies that ICDT is a pure theory venue, meaning the primary deliverable is not runnable code or system badges, but the complete, verifiable proof. Key components include the marked appendix (for review) and the consistent, archived full version on arXiv.

This guide provides comprehensive best practices for authors submitting software artifacts to academic venues like ICSME. It details how to structure packages, track provenance, and document code to achieve the IEEE Open Research Object and Research Object Reviewed badges. Learn how to design for rigorous, reproducible evaluation by evaluators in a bounded time frame.

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 walks authors through the critical steps of transitioning an accepted academic paper from an anonymous submission to the final, published, double-column camera-ready version. It covers de-anonymization (restoring author details, links), fulfilling all review promises, completing ACM metadata and rights, coordinating artifact badges, and planning the in-person conference presentation.