Skill UI

A comprehensive audit checklist for authors preparing submissions for top-tier academic conferences like PODC. This guide covers critical submission stages, including the two-step abstract registration, selecting the appropriate paper track (Regular vs. Brief Announcement), adhering to the 10-page merits rule, maintaining double-blind anonymity, and ensuring the mathematical rigor of the proof. Use this before final submission.

This guide provides critical advice on structuring technical research papers for major academic conferences. It emphasizes the crucial distinction between 'decision-critical' content (must appear in the first 10 pages) and 'verification-detail' content (can be deferred to the appendix). It also advises on choosing the correct submission track (Regular Paper vs. Brief Announcement).

This guide helps researchers navigate the complex landscape of academic publishing in distributed computing. It provides detailed criteria to differentiate between major specialized venues (like PODC, DISC, SPAA) and general systems conferences (ICDCS, OSDI). By analyzing the model, cost measure, and nature of the proof (e.g., provable guarantees, impossibility results), users can determine the best fit for their theoretical contribution, thereby avoiding common submission mistakes and maximizing impact.

A comprehensive guide detailing the end-to-end annual workflow for submitting to an academic conference. This resource covers critical milestones, including abstract registration, full-paper submission, review notification, and camera-ready preparation. It emphasizes strategic planning—such as timing proof completion and deciding between paper tracks—to maximize the chances of successful publication.

This guide outlines the stringent structural requirements for writing papers on distributed systems theory, specifically for top-tier conferences like PODC. It details how to front-load the core arguments, define the model box rigorously (network, timing, fault model), structure proofs logically, and ensure the key results are visible within the critical first 10 pages.

This guide details the standards for submitting theoretical computer science papers, focusing on the required "formal-claims package." It emphasizes that the deliverable is not a runnable systems artifact, but a rigorous academic package containing a complete, self-contained proof appendix, a clear mapping of every stated claim to its proof location, and a full, publicly available version on arXiv.

A comprehensive guide for authors on navigating the two distinct response phases of academic conferences (e.g., PODS). It details how to write a concise, double-anonymous rebuttal (48-hour turn) and a structured revision cover letter, ensuring all technical gaps are addressed while maintaining anonymity and professional rigor.

This guide provides comprehensive steps for preparing a camera-ready version of an accepted academic conference paper, such as those for the PACMMOD PODS track. It covers essential tasks including complete de-anonymization, applying final journal formatting, integrating required revisions, populating detailed metadata (ORCID, DOI, CCS concepts), and ensuring the full version is correctly posted and cross-linked on arXiv.

This comprehensive guide provides a rigorous framework for auditing the technical and mathematical evidence in theoretical computer science papers. It instructs authors on how to ensure that every claim—especially those regarding optimality or complexity bounds—is supported by matching lower and upper bounds, explicit assumptions, and consistent cost models. It emphasizes that the evidence must be robust proofs, not merely empirical benchmarks.

This guide directs authors on how to structure the related work section for academic papers in database theory (e.g., for venues like PODS, ICDT). It emphasizes a 'delta-first' approach, requiring authors to compare their specific *results* (theorems, bounds, dichotomies) directly against the nearest prior *results*, rather than simply cataloging related citations. It also covers complex rules regarding self-citation, anonymity, and overlap declaration with concurrent or prior-version work.

This guide outlines the rigorous standards for academic paper reproducibility, particularly for theoretical venues. It mandates a complete, self-contained claim-to-proof map, ensuring every stated theorem or bound is fully provable within the submitted document, thereby preventing reliance on external or deferred proofs.

This guide details the rigorous and multi-stage academic review process for submissions to the PODS conference. It moves beyond simple accept/reject decisions, explaining the importance of multi-cycle revisions, shepherded rounds, and the strict focus on mathematical proofs and theoretical correctness. It helps authors understand how to strategically strengthen their work for high-impact, theory-based venues.