Skill UI

This guide details how to audit and position security research submissions for premier academic venues like CCS, S&P, USENIX, and NDSS. It teaches authors to structure their 'Related Work' section by comparing their novelty against the 'security big four,' specialist literature, and real-world practitioner records (such as CVEs and vendor advisories). The goal is to clearly articulate the technical delta and eligibility for publication.

This comprehensive guide assists researchers in determining the optimal top-tier academic venue (such as CCS, S&P, USENIX, NDSS, PETS) for their security research. It teaches how to rigorously classify the security contribution type, sharpen the threat model, and assess the technical fit of the work based on its nature (attack, defense, protocol, etc.).

This guide details the USENIX FAST artifact evaluation process, providing systematic advice for researchers submitting system papers. It explains the requirements for earning the three USENIX badges (Available, Functional, Reproduced). Key topics include managing hardware dependencies in storage systems, packaging best practices (e.g., Docker containers, raw logs, comprehensive READMEs), and ensuring the final artifact is maximally reproducible for external evaluation.

A comprehensive guide for authors preparing a USENIX FAST camera-ready version. It details all necessary post-acceptance steps, including complete de-anonymization, applying the official two-column template, integrating required revisions, and permanently archiving all artifacts with DOIs to meet strict publication deadlines.

A comprehensive guide modeling the USENIX FAST conference submission review pipeline. It details the double-blind review process, the author-response period, and clarifies the four distinct outcomes (Accept, Shepherding, One-shot Revision, Reject). This resource helps authors understand the strategic implications of the review stages, especially how a one-shot revision differs from standard journal revisions, providing actionable advice for maximizing submission chances.

This comprehensive audit guide helps authors prepare submissions for USENIX FAST, covering critical details like selecting the correct deadline (Spring/Fall), adhering to USENIX two-column formatting, managing strict page limits, performing double-blind anonymization, and detailing artifact availability. Use this checklist before uploading to HotCRP to minimize desk rejects.

This comprehensive guide helps authors structure and partition their research findings for top-tier academic conferences, such as USENIX FAST. It defines the strict rules for separating core, decision-critical evidence (which must reside in the main body) from supporting materials, artifacts, and appendices, ensuring compliance with page budgets and double-blind review standards.

A comprehensive guide for researchers deciding the optimal conference venue (e.g., FAST, OSDI, NSDI, ATC) for their storage-related academic work. It advises on distinguishing a core storage contribution from general systems results, detailing specific contribution shapes FAST rewards, and providing routing logic based on the project's nature and evidence maturity.

This guide provides a comprehensive project management workflow for submitting research to the USENIX FAST conference. It covers the entire academic lifecycle, detailing milestones from initial topic selection and evidence locking to double-blind submission, author response, and managing the complex two-deadline cycle, including potential one-shot revisions. Use this to back-plan your research schedule based on concrete storage measurement timelines.

A comprehensive guide for authors submitting storage-related research to top-tier conferences (e.g., USENIX FAST). It dictates how to structure the paper, emphasizing leading with the specific storage cost addressed (e.g., write amplification, tail latency, endurance) and grounding all claims in proportional, real-device evidence rather than generic performance statements. Essential for ensuring technical rigor and reviewer trust.

This guide helps researchers evaluate whether a security or privacy project is a suitable fit for top-tier academic conferences like IEEE S&P. It covers critical fit tests, such as establishing a defensible threat model and ensuring end-to-end evidence closure. It also provides advice on SoK paper formats, routing among major security venues (USENIX, CCS, NDSS), and adhering to submission rules like one-year embargoes.

This comprehensive guide helps researchers determine the most appropriate venue for their networking research paper. It distinguishes between major conferences like INFOCOM (broad, analytical/optimization), ACM SIGCOMM (built systems, deployment story), and USENIX NSDI (artifact-heavy systems). Use it to route your work correctly before drafting.