Skill UI

Guidelines for ensuring academic proofs are completely verifiable by third parties, especially when theorems are distributed across multiple documents (e.g., extended abstract and full version). It emphasizes single-source builds, preventing statement drift, and detailing computational determinism requirements for maximum rigor in theoretical computer science research.

This skill provides a comprehensive assessment framework for submitting manuscripts to the journal 'Systems Engineering Theory and Practice.' It helps researchers determine the manuscript's fit, required methodological depth (e.g., modeling, algorithms), structural adherence, and potential revision paths. It serves as a crucial guide to meet the high academic standards of a specialized systems engineering publication.

This guide outlines the rigorous process for submitting and evaluating research artifacts for academic conferences (TACAS/ETAPS). It details the mandatory two-round evaluation system, covering tool-demonstration papers and general research case studies. Authors must package their work to achieve badges like Available, Functional, and Reusable, ensuring maximum reproducibility and environmental compatibility on a clean virtual machine.

This comprehensive guide details the mandatory production steps required after a research paper is accepted for publication in Springer LNCS. Key tasks include de-anonymizing the manuscript (restoring true names, affiliations, and funding details), applying the specific llncs.cls format, finalizing metadata with ORCIDs, integrating reviewer feedback, permanently linking artifacts using DOIs, and completing the CC-BY open-access licensing forms.

This comprehensive guide outlines best practices for designing and auditing empirical evaluations of formal verification tools and algorithms. It stresses the use of shared, community-accepted benchmarks, ensuring fair comparison against the strongest baselines with equal resources, meticulous reporting of all metrics, validating results for soundness, and guaranteeing full reproducibility on clean virtual environments.

This guide provides detailed guidelines for authors submitting to top-tier formal methods conferences (like TACAS). It emphasizes moving beyond simple literature summaries by employing a "delta-first" approach. Authors must precisely position their algorithm or tool by contrasting its novel features, guarantees, or scaling benefits against the nearest prior work, while also crediting underlying infrastructure and covering major verification venues.

A comprehensive guide detailing the complex submission and evaluation pipeline for TACAS (Tools and Algorithms for Scientific Applications). It models key features such as category-specific blind review, the mandatory parallel artifact evaluation for tool papers, and the single-round conference decision-making process, helping authors strategically prepare their submissions.

A comprehensive pre-submission checklist for authors preparing papers for TACAS/ETAPS. It guides users through selecting the correct paper category (research, tool, case-study), adhering to specific Springer LNCS page limits, managing double-blind vs. single-blind review rules, and correctly staging mandatory tool artifacts to ensure acceptance readiness.

This guide provides comprehensive rules for structuring academic technical papers, specifically addressing the division of content between the main body, appendices, supplementary websites, and mandatory artifacts. It ensures that all decision-critical arguments, soundness claims, and core comparisons are contained within the primary reviewed pages, making the paper fully judgeable without external resources.

This guide provides comprehensive rules for authors submitting research papers to verification experts (TACAS/LNCS). It emphasizes stating the core contribution immediately, explicitly claiming soundness or completeness, supporting empirical claims with fair and reproducible benchmarks, and aligning the paper structure with its specific category (research, tool, case study).

This guide details the structured process for drafting a comprehensive response and rebuttal letter after a The Accounting Review (TAR) revise-and-resubmit cycle. It covers how to address point-by-point reviewer comments, reconcile conflicting demands, and address key methodological concerns like identification, contribution, and data authenticity, ensuring the revised submission is professional and robust.

A comprehensive guide for authors targeting The Astrophysical Journal (ApJ) or its Letters companion (ApJL). It helps determine manuscript fit, ensures methodological rigor, and outlines house style requirements, covering everything from data availability and systematic uncertainty analysis to article length limitations. This tool assists in structuring high-quality, archival-grade astrophysics research papers.