Skill UI

This guide provides a rigorous framework for evaluating computer architecture designs. It covers critical steps including selecting the appropriate simulation instrument (from analytical models to silicon measurements), constructing robust baselines, performing ablation studies, and reporting comprehensive metrics like geomeans and full overhead accounting to ensure scientific validity.

A detailed guide on how to write a rigorous and comparative 'Related Work' section for top-tier microarchitecture conferences (e.g., MICRO). It teaches authors to structure the section as a 'mechanism taxonomy,' differentiating designs based on structural and cost differences rather than merely listing citations. Key areas covered include sweeping academic venues, integrating industry disclosures, and verifying all venue attributions using tools like dblp.

A comprehensive guide for microarchitecture researchers on achieving rigorous scientific reproducibility. It mandates tracking every critical artifact—including simulator commits, workload traces, power/area models, and RTL toolchains—and compiling them into a single run manifest, ensuring any reported result can be verified by a third party.

A comprehensive guide for drafting and revising high-level microarchitecture papers for top-tier conferences. It mandates the rigorous 'four-beat argument' structure: starting with characterization evidence, defining the insight, detailing the mechanism, and completing with thorough cost accounting. This ensures the paper is a defensible engineering argument.

Provides comprehensive guidelines for achieving high reproducibility in Machine Learning Systems (MLSys) performance claims. It details how to rigorously control sources of non-determinism (e.g., thermal noise, random seeds) and pin the entire technical stack—from hardware and drivers to frameworks and serving policies—to ensure results can be validated by third parties.

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.

This comprehensive guide provides best practices and an audit checklist for designing robust, real-world experiments in mobile and wireless communication systems. It emphasizes moving beyond simulations, detailing necessary RF setups, quantifiable energy metrics, and reporting statistical distributions to ensure high academic credibility.

A comprehensive guide to ensuring reproducibility in radio frequency (RF) physical layer measurements. It details the necessity of maintaining a detailed provenance ledger—recording radio hardware, channel conditions, mobility patterns, and software versions at the time of the run. The goal is not bit-identical results, but documenting variance and methodology so that findings can be validated on different testbeds or later in time, while also addressing legal and ethical data shipping constraints.

Provides a comprehensive methodology for evaluating mobile computing systems. It mandates rigorous, real-device testing, focusing on instrumenting energy consumption, thermal behavior, latency distribution (tails), and memory limits. This guide ensures academic submissions are credible, repeatable, and compare performance against robust, tuned baselines.

A comprehensive guide for authors planning submissions to MobiSys. It details the two-round review process, the specialized pool of systems-and-services reviewers, and critical scoring dimensions such as on-device evidence, energy/latency rigor, and contribution mechanism. Use this to formulate a robust response strategy for every stage, from initial submission to camera-ready.

This guide provides detailed instructions for authors submitting supplementary material for conferences like MobiSys. It helps authors categorize content—distinguishing between core material (must be in the main body), supporting evidence (appendix), demonstration media, and runnable artifacts—while strictly adhering to double-blind and page-limit constraints. The goal is to ensure the main paper is self-contained and fully judgeable.

This guide provides rigorous structural and disciplinary rules for authors submitting mobile-systems research to highly competitive conferences like MobiSys. It emphasizes moving beyond mere superlatives, mandating that all claims must be substantiated by explicit measurements of latency, energy, memory, and thermal budgets on real devices. Learn how to structure the paper to survive deep technical and systems-level peer review.