Skill UI

A comprehensive guide for researchers in electronics and signal processing preparing submissions to Acta Electronica Sinica (AES). It outlines best practices for proactively structuring, documenting, and disclosing research artifacts—including code, datasets, and hardware designs—to maximize the paper's credibility and chances of acceptance, even without mandatory journal badges. Covers anonymization, reproducibility standards, and proper disclosure in the manuscript.

This guide details the process of packaging and evaluating academic artifacts for ACM CCS conferences. It outlines the criteria for earning specific ACM badges (e.g., Functional, Reusable, Results Reproduced) by ensuring that supporting evidence—such as exploits, defenses, and measurement pipelines—is turnkey, reproducible, and rigorously documented for the review committee. It covers best practices for artifact planning, handling sensitive material, and justifying any withheld components.

This guide outlines the process for converting accepted academic papers into optional ACM reproducibility badges. It walks authors through the rigorous evaluation cycle, covering everything from initial opt-in before submission to providing detailed one-page artifact descriptions. The goal is to prove that the research results are available, functionally sound, highly reusable, and accurately reproducible by independent evaluators.

Provides guidelines for creating robust, verifiable, and reusable Electronic Design Automation (EDA) artifacts for submission to academic conferences like DAC. The focus shifts from chasing conference badges to ensuring community trust and scientific reproducibility. Key elements include pinning the toolchain, using standard benchmarks, providing clear setup instructions, and archiving the release in a DOI-issuing repository.

A comprehensive guide for researchers preparing academic artifacts for voluntary, post-acceptance evaluation (e.g., HPCA). It outlines best practices for structuring submissions for cold-start evaluators, defining reproducibility tiers (full reproduction, regeneration from logs, inspection), and managing computational budgets to successfully earn IEEE reproducibility badges.

This guide details the comprehensive process for preparing security research artifacts for post-acceptance evaluation at major conferences like IEEE S&P. It covers the three types of evaluation badges (Available, Functional, Results Reproduced), strict handling constraints for exploits and malware, and best practices for packaging the submission (e.g., Dockerfiles, README structure) to ensure external evaluators can reliably reproduce findings within a limited time frame.

Provides a comprehensive guide for packaging complex research artifacts, integrating hardware, firmware, and datasets. It outlines best practices for achieving academic badges (e.g., Available, Functional, Reusable) and winning the Best Research Artifact Award. Learn how to structure analysis paths, manage raw traces, and ensure reproducibility across different evaluation environments.

This guide provides authors with best practices for improving the reproducibility and verifiable availability of communication experiments for submission to JOC. It clarifies the journal's current status regarding artifact badges, offering actionable advice on openly sharing code, data, and simulation parameters to enhance credibility while maintaining academic rigor.

This guide details the process of preparing complex research artifacts (simulators, configurations, traces, and scripts) for post-acceptance evaluation, especially for microarchitecture papers. It outlines best practices for achieving ACM badges like 'Available' and 'Reproducible,' focusing on structuring the code base with tiered entry points (smoke, key, full) and handling dependencies, licensed data, and simulation time constraints.

This guide details the rigorous process for packaging research artifacts in mobile communications for academic evaluation committees (AEC). It emphasizes creating a hardware-optional path, defining claims (badges), and ensuring reproducibility through smoke runs, recorded replay paths, and permanent DOI-backed archiving, allowing evaluation even without specialized lab equipment.

A comprehensive guide for submitting research artifacts to the MobiSys Artifact Evaluation Committee (AEC). It details the process for achieving three independent ACM badges (Available, Functional, Results Reproduced). Emphasis is placed on creating fully reproducible, script-first workflows, designing for hardware-optional environments, and maintaining strict anonymity during review.

A comprehensive guide for authors preparing accepted academic papers for artifact evaluation at major conferences (e.g., NSDI). It details how to package code, traces, and testbed recipes to ensure permanent public availability, achieve recognition badges (Functionality, Availability, Reproducibility), and meet community award criteria. Learn best practices for reproducibility and structured submission.