Skill UI

A comprehensive guide for authors submitting technical papers, detailing methods to ensure that all reported claims, figures, and benchmark numbers can be independently regenerated. This involves creating VM-ready, self-contained artifacts, mapping every claim to a specific script, and defining clear reproducibility levels (Turnkey, Scripted) to satisfy conference requirements.

This guide details the methodology for packaging scientific artifacts (code, solvers, data, logs) for machine learning submissions. It focuses on creating double-blind, self-contained ZIP archives that allow reviewers to independently and quickly verify complex probabilistic claims, even under strict time constraints. It covers best practices for anonymity, structured README generation, and handling data/licensing.

This guide details advanced best practices for achieving scientific reproducibility in probabilistic modeling and deep learning research. It mandates rigorous disclosure of seeds, hyperparameters, diagnostic traces (e.g., R-hat, ELBO), and compute environments to ensure that all claims made in academic papers are verifiably backed by traceable evidence. It elevates reproducibility from a simple code run to a comprehensive audit.

A comprehensive guide detailing how to package and present research artifacts—including code, hardware designs, and datasets—for major academic conferences. It outlines best practices for both initial review-time evidence and long-term public reuse, ensuring reproducibility and maximizing the chances of adoption by future builders.

This guide provides a rigorous methodology for achieving scientific reproducibility in technical and user experience papers (e.g., UIST). It details three essential 'ledgers': the Build Ledger (pinning software, hardware, and environment dependencies), the Measurement Ledger (defining precise protocols for metrics like latency and accuracy), and the Study Ledger (documenting human evaluation tasks). Following these protocols ensures that external researchers can accurately rebuild the artifact and validate reported results.

A comprehensive guide detailing the mandatory and optional evaluation phases for academic security artifacts, such as those required for USENIX Security. It covers Phase-1 (availability) checks and Phase-2 (functionality, reproducibility) requirements. Provides best practices for structuring code, managing technical hazards (e.g., dangerous-by-default behavior), and ensuring verifiable, reproducible results for peer review.

This guide covers the mandatory Open Science appendix for high-level security research. It instructs authors on enumerating all artifacts (code, datasets, configurations), documenting data withholding decisions, and implementing engineering controls (like environment pinning and version tracking) to ensure that published results are independently and reliably reproducible.

This comprehensive guide provides an end-to-end planning framework for USENIX Security Symposium submissions. It assists researchers in selecting the optimal submission cycle, mapping backward timelines from key milestones (like registration), assigning ownership for venue-specific risks (e.g., ethics, reproducibility), and coordinating through the complex post-submission decision process (Accept/Reject).

A comprehensive guide detailing the standards for scientific reproducibility in visualization research, particularly for IEEE VIS submissions. It outlines the Graphics Replicability Stamp Initiative (GRSI) requirements, covering how independent volunteers must reproduce results using provided code, data, and environments (e.g., Docker containers). Learn how to package your work—including determinism aids, mapping tables, and licensed data—to pass rigorous, clean-machine testing.

This guide details best practices for achieving high standards of reproducibility in visual analytics papers, focusing on open materials, verifiable code, and rigorous documentation. It covers mapping figures to data sources, preregistering studies, documenting data provenance, and defining the level of reproducibility achieved (e.g., turnkey, scripted).

A comprehensive guide for authors submitting visualization papers to major conferences like IEEE VIS. It outlines the strict rules for partitioning content, ensuring the core argument remains judgeable from the main body while leveraging supplemental materials (video, code, full data) to demonstrate interaction and reproducibility. Essential reading for academic researchers in the field.

This guide outlines the methodology for preparing research artifacts for rigorous academic reproducibility evaluations, such as those run by VLDB/SIGMOD. It details the required components—including prototype code, input data, workloads, and analysis scripts—to structure a comprehensive package. The goal is to ensure that any external evaluator can independently and flawlessly rebuild and validate all claimed results, maximizing the chances of winning reproducibility awards.