Skill UI

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 provides a comprehensive framework for drafting authoritative author responses during academic conference reviews (e.g., ISSTA). It covers triage strategies, distinguishing between factual corrections and promised changes, and structuring a Major-Revision ledger. Learn how to address reviewer concerns strategically, maintain anonymity, and anchor all claims to evidence for maximizing acceptance chances.

This guide outlines the critical steps required after an academic paper has been accepted at a major conference. It details the process of converting an anonymous submission into the final, camera-ready version for publication in the ACM Digital Library. Key steps include de-anonymization (restoring author details, affiliations, and funding), completing ACM rights forms and metadata (ORCIDs, CCS), verifying the final layout integrity after template changes, and confirming presentation obligations.

This guide provides comprehensive guidelines for designing, conducting, and auditing empirical studies in software engineering. It emphasizes achieving scientific rigor by matching every claim to specific, measured evidence, ensuring fair baselining (equal budget), and applying appropriate advanced statistics (non-parametric tests, effect sizes). Essential reading for researchers submitting papers based on performance evaluations.

Provides comprehensive guidelines for achieving high reproducibility and verifiability in academic research submissions, particularly for software analysis, fuzzing, and bug finding. It details the necessity of pinning substrates (like benchmark versions and program SHAs), fixing stochastic parameters (seeds and budgets), and mapping every empirical claim to verifiable evidence to meet stringent academic evaluation criteria.

This guide simulates and advises on the complex, multi-stage process of academic peer review, modeled after rigorous conferences like ISSTA. It covers double-anonymous reviewing, the Accept/Major-Revision/Reject outcome model, and detailed evaluation criteria (e.g., Soundness, Verifiability). Use it to structure research arguments, anticipate reviewer critiques, and plan revisions through multiple submission deadlines.

A comprehensive guide for authors submitting research papers to ISSTA. It details critical steps such as adhering to ACM sigconf formatting, maintaining the 18-page limit, enforcing double-anonymous review, establishing the artifact plan, and managing HotCRP registration to prevent desk rejection.

Provides detailed guidelines for authors submitting technical research papers, clarifying how to split content between the main 18-page body and supplementary artifacts. It stresses that all decision-critical evidence, such as threat models and core results, must reside within the reviewed body to ensure reviewers can adequately evaluate the work without relying on accessing supplemental materials.

This guide helps researchers determine the optimal conference or journal venue for their software engineering contribution. It specifically addresses whether the core of the work is a testing or analysis technique evaluated on real subjects (ISSTA), or if it fits better within broader Software Engineering (ICSE/FSE), formal verification (PLDI/CAV), or applied domains.

A comprehensive guide for planning and executing a scientific paper submission for the ISSTA conference. It maps out all critical milestones, including venue fit, evidence locking, submission deadlines, major revisions, and artifact evaluation. The skill provides backward planning heuristics and identifies common failure modes to ensure timely and successful publication.

A comprehensive guide for authors revising technical papers for top-tier conferences like ISSTA. It details the necessary structure, emphasizing strict scope definition, establishing clear evaluation contracts (subjects, baselines, metrics), pairing every claim with concrete evidence, and adhering to specialized review discipline.

This skill serves as a comprehensive guide for researchers to evaluate their academic manuscripts for suitability in Issues in Agricultural Economy. It covers the journal's precise scope, preferred methodologies (e.g., DID, micro-data), submission policies (blind review, fees), and common rejection pitfalls. It provides actionable advice on structuring and refining the manuscript to meet the rigorous standards of core Chinese academic journals focusing on rural and agricultural policies.