Skill UI

A comprehensive checklist and guide for authors submitting research papers to PVLDB (Proceedings of the VLDB Endowment). This resource details critical steps, including adherence to multiple deadlines (abstract, full paper), category budget selection, single-blind formatting rules, and author co-contribution caps, ensuring submissions avoid desk rejection.

A comprehensive guide for authors submitting to academic conferences, addressing strict page limitations where appendices count against the core budget. It details best practices for distributing supplementary evidence across three external homes: the main paper, dedicated arXiv technical reports, and artifact repositories. The guide emphasizes maintaining self-containment, managing version discipline, and strategically cutting content to ensure the core claims are reviewable.

A detailed guide for revising academic papers, specifically tailored for systems and database conferences like VLDB. It emphasizes establishing a strong 'page-one contract,' quantifying all performance claims with scoped metrics and baselines, and maintaining rigorous candor regarding design trade-offs and terminology throughout the manuscript.

A comprehensive guide for creating the two required artifacts for a WACV paper: an anonymous package for double-blind review, and a public release post-acceptance. It emphasizes reproducing deployed system claims (latency, power, robustness) and maintaining consistency across revision rounds.

A comprehensive guide for transforming an accepted, anonymous conference paper into the final, public version of record for WACV. It covers critical steps including de-anonymization, incorporating final revisions, ensuring dual publication compliance (IEEE Xplore & CVF), fulfilling data/code release obligations, and preparing the presentation material.

A comprehensive guide for structuring the 'Related Work' section in academic papers, especially in Computer Vision (CV). It teaches authors how to strategically position their research contribution by covering multiple literature shelves: vision methods, domain constraints, concurrent arXiv work, and prior art. This ensures the paper clearly defines a unique gap rather than merely listing citations, adhering to double-blind review standards.

A comprehensive guide for strengthening the reproducibility of academic papers, especially those involving systems claims (e.g., power usage, latency). It details maintaining a 'recipe ledger' for all reported metrics, ensuring constraint-aware measurement of environmental variables, and managing data/artifact consistency across the entire two-round revision process.

This guide models the comprehensive two-round, journal-style peer review process used at major computer vision conferences like WACV. It details the distinct stages: Round 1 outcomes (Accept, Revise and Resubmit, Reject), the optional R1 rebuttal phase, and the final R2 decision. It emphasizes that the most critical phase for authors is executing high-quality revisions during the Revise-and-Resubmit stage, rather than solely relying on rebuttals.

A comprehensive guide for authors submitting to major conferences (like WACV). It details how to properly split content between the main 8-page paper body and the supplementary material. Key focus areas include maintaining double-blind anonymity, structuring evidence for reviewers, and ensuring consistency across multiple revision rounds.

This guide helps researchers determine the optimal venue for their Computer Vision paper, specifically addressing the unique identity of WACV (Applications-first) versus major conferences like CVPR, ICCV, and ECCV. It guides authors on whether their contribution is driven by real-world applications/constraints or by advancing core algorithms, and how to choose between the Applications or Algorithms track within WACV.

A comprehensive guide to structuring and writing academic papers for WACV, focusing on maximizing acceptance rates. It details the critical differences between writing for 'Applications' vs. 'Algorithms' tracks, ensuring the first page immediately captures reviewer attention. Key advice includes adhering to the strict 8-page budget, making figures self-contained, scoping all claims precisely, and moving excessive detail to supplements.

A comprehensive strategy guide for submitting academic papers to The World Bank Economic Review (WBER). It teaches researchers how to anticipate and preempt common criticisms from development-economics referees (identification flaws, policy relevance, data quality) and how to structure the cover letter to maximize acceptance chances.