Skill UI

This guide details the academic review process for HPCA, including the double-blind review format, the structure of the single combined rebuttal/revision window, and the dynamics of program-committee meetings. Use this to set clear expectations, predict outcomes, and strategically prepare your rebuttal to maximize your paper's chances of acceptance.

This comprehensive guide details the rigorous, double-blind, two-phase review process of the ACM/IEEE HRI conference. It breaks down every stage—from initial desk checks and track assignments to the critical author rebuttal and program-committee meetings. Learn where authors can maximize their impact, what reviewers prioritize (impact over polish), and how to strategically write rebuttals to influence the final decision.

A comprehensive guide detailing the ICASSP peer review pipeline, covering single-blind review mechanics, technical committee evaluation criteria, and the strategic importance of evidence, significance, and reproducibility in signal processing papers. Use this to craft submission strategies and decode decision letters.

A comprehensive guide for authors preparing a rebuttal following academic conference early decisions (e.g., ICSME). It details how to structure a highly focused, single-round response, emphasizing answering specific Program Committee questions, using only evidence already present in the submitted work, and maintaining strict anonymity. This skill is crucial for maximizing impact when a major revision round is unavailable.

A comprehensive model detailing the rigorous, multi-stage peer review cycle for top-tier security conferences like IEEE S&P. It covers every phase, from initial submission and first-round screening to the three-way decision (Accept/Revise/Reject), ethical committee review, and post-acceptance shepherding. Ideal for authors needing to understand the structural constraints and adversarial nature of academic publishing.

A comprehensive guide for researchers submitting to major speech conferences (like INTERSPEECH). It details how to harden the reproducibility of speech results, covering crucial 'decay channels' such as corpus versions, text normalization rules (WER), objective metrics (EER), subjective protocols (MOS), and model stochasticity. The guide emphasizes pinning specific toolkits, commit hashes, configurations, and hardware details to ensure scientific rigor and verifiability.

This comprehensive guide details the end-to-end technical program committee (TPC) review process for major academic conferences like INTERSPEECH. It walks through every stage—from initial submission and area assignment to independent review, rebuttal, meta-review, and final decision. Users can learn how to decode reviewer feedback, understand the limitations of the rebuttal, and develop a strategic plan for future submissions and research refinement.

A comprehensive guide for managing the high-stakes rebuttal and revision period after major academic conference submissions. It teaches authors how to strategically triage reviewer objections (factual errors, evidence gaps, design flaws) by their leverage, structure the written response for maximum committee impact, and perform surgical revisions without inadvertently restructuring the core paper.

A comprehensive guide on achieving scientific reproducibility for complex computer architecture and system simulations. It details how to manage and pin all dependencies—including simulator commit hashes, local patches, workload binaries, hardware states, and post-processing scripts—to ensure that every reported figure and number can be accurately regenerated, regardless of time or environment changes.

This guide models the three-stage review process for the Journal on Communications (JOC). It helps authors understand the initial screening (format, relevance, plagiarism), expert peer review, and final committee review. By predicting potential outcomes and identifying strategic 'levers' at each stage, users can effectively revise manuscripts, manage submission timelines, and significantly increase the chances of successful publication in communication, networking, or information security fields.

This comprehensive guide assists researchers in ensuring their manuscripts meet stringent ethical and research integrity standards required by top-tier journals. It covers critical areas such as ethics committee approval, informed consent, declarations of interest, funder roles, data sharing, and SAGER guidelines, helping authors improve submission readiness.

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.