Skill UI

This guide provides authors with comprehensive best practices for submitting research artifacts (e.g., compilers, benchmarks, proofs) for post-acceptance evaluation at PLDI. It details how to structure the submission, ensuring reproducibility, containerization, and clear documentation to achieve Functional, Reusable, or Available badges.

This guide details the best practices for submitting supplementary material (like full proofs, benchmark data, and source code) for major academic conferences. It instructs authors on strategically placing content to enhance depth while strictly maintaining double-blind anonymity and ensuring perfect consistency between the main paper and its supporting appendices.

This guide provides a detailed framework for researchers to determine the most suitable venue (e.g., PLDI, POPL, OOPSLA) for their programming language or systems research paper. It guides authors on whether their core evidence lies in theoretical proofs, working implementations with benchmarks, or empirical usage studies, ensuring optimal submission routing and maximizing acceptance chances.

A crucial guide for authors preparing for PODC (Proofs venue). It corrects the common misconception that runnable artifacts or badges are required. Instead, it redirects focus to the three core areas of evaluation: ensuring proof completeness, establishing model rigor by declaring all assumptions, and maintaining transparency for optional simulations.

A comprehensive guide for authors preparing a rebuttal or response to peer reviews for major academic conferences. It details how to maximize impact by focusing exclusively on correcting factual proof misreadings, supplying missing lemmas, and clarifying technical bounds, while strictly avoiding arguments of significance or taste. Emphasizes maintaining anonymity and adherence to the double-blind format.

A comprehensive guide for authors on preparing an accepted academic paper for ACM conference proceedings. This includes de-anonymizing the manuscript, compressing the content to the strict 10-page two-column format, migrating full proofs to arXiv, and completing all required ACM metadata (rights, CCS concepts).

This guide outlines the rigorous standards for presenting 'evidence' in highly theoretical computing venues. It emphasizes that results must be supported by deep mathematical proofs, establishing matching upper and lower bounds (tightness), and meticulously auditing all underlying model assumptions (e.g., timing, failure modes). It shifts focus from empirical benchmarks to formal correctness.

This guide provides guidelines for ensuring that academic proofs are independently verifiable, particularly for proofs-focused conferences. It covers creating self-contained proof appendices, meticulously defining all underlying assumptions in a 'model box' contract, and ensuring perfect synchronization between the short conference proceedings and the full arXiv version.

This guide details the rigorous and single-shot review process for ACM's Principles of Distributed Computing (PODC). Unlike venues with major revision rounds, PODC focuses entirely on the strength of the proof, the significance of the result, and the honesty of the model. It outlines the criteria (correctness, novelty, tightness) and emphasizes that all necessary work must be completed pre-submission, as there are no post-acceptance revision cycles.

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 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.