Skill UI

A detailed auditing guide for submitting to major academic conferences, such as ECCV. It covers critical aspects including multi-stage submission deadlines (CET timezone), strict LNCS formatting rules (14 pages single-column), policy adherence (dual-submission, embargo rules), and pre-upload checks to mitigate rejection risks. Essential for researchers managing academic publishing workflows.

A comprehensive strategic guide for authors responding to peer reviews at top-tier academic conferences. It teaches how to interpret reviews as a 'bin-sorting' problem, structure persuasive rebuttals, address specific technical objections (measurement, design), and convert vague revision conditions into a concrete, actionable resubmission contract and plan.

This detailed project management skill provides a comprehensive, backward-planning guide for submitting to highly structured academic conferences, such as HPCA. It maps out critical milestones—from initial venue fit and evidence locking to review, revision, and final camera-ready submission—while identifying common failure modes and coordination requirements to maximize acceptance chances.

A comprehensive guide for authors submitting data-intensive systems papers to top-tier conferences (like ICDE). It details how to structure the paper, ensure technical claims are reconstructable, quantify all performance gains with associated costs, and compress complex ideas into a limited page budget while maintaining scholarly rigor.

A comprehensive, final-gate audit guide for submitting papers to major robotics conferences like ICRA using the PaperPlaza system. It details mandatory technical specifications, including page limits (6 content + 2 refs), IEEE two-column compliance, double-anonymous rules, video attachment specs, and critical deadlines. Essential reading to prevent submission rejection or administrative disqualification.

A comprehensive model detailing the rigorous, multi-stage peer review cycle for top-tier security conferences like IEEE S&P. It covers every phase, from initial submission and first-round screening to the three-way decision (Accept/Revise/Reject), ethical committee review, and post-acceptance shepherding. Ideal for authors needing to understand the structural constraints and adversarial nature of academic publishing.

A comprehensive guide for authors targeting top-tier conferences like AVI. It helps assess the suitability of a computer science manuscript for visual interaction, interactive visualization, and multimodal interfaces. The tool provides strategies for re-framing the paper, identifying necessary evidence (user tasks, empirical findings), and structuring the submission to meet specific venue expectations.

This comprehensive guide addresses the unique challenges of submitting research to top-tier conferences that do not include formal author-response or major revision rounds. It teaches authors a proactive strategy: how to pre-empt potential reviewer objections (e.g., novelty, scope limitations) by embedding necessary arguments, proofs, and context directly into the initial submission. Furthermore, it provides actionable plans for navigating both acceptance (camera-ready fixes) and rejection (diagnosis and strategic rerouting) without relying on traditional appeal processes.

A comprehensive guide detailing the cyclical workflow for major academic conferences (e.g., NSDI). It helps research teams strategically plan multi-year projects, managing multiple submission gates (Spring/Fall), revisions, and long waiting periods. Essential for structuring research efforts and avoiding common pitfalls like double-submission or missed deadlines.

This comprehensive guide outlines the entire lifecycle of submitting and revising academic papers for major conferences like OOPSLA. It details strategic decisions, such as choosing between October or March submission rounds, managing the state machine (Accept, Minor, Major Revision, Reject), budgeting time for necessary revisions, and planning post-publication artifacts and talks. Essential for academic research teams.

A comprehensive guide detailing the necessary author response techniques for high-stakes academic conferences, particularly focusing on the shift from traditional rebuttals to structured, mandated revision cycles (shepherding). It covers pre-submission pre-mortems, managing mandated changes using a change matrix, and maintaining professional rigor throughout the review process. Ideal for PhD students and researchers.

A comprehensive guide for drafting a structured, double-blind academic rebuttal for conferences (like PerCom). This skill focuses on addressing explicit reviewer questions using only evidence already present in the submitted paper, thereby avoiding the promise of new experiments. It covers maintaining anonymity, structuring arguments, and focusing on core technical dimensions like cross-subject evaluation and metric soundness.