Skill UI

Provides comprehensive guidelines for authors submitting papers to Acta Automatica Sinica (AAS). It details how to organize and present anonymous, reproducible code, data, and experimental artifacts to enhance the credibility and rigor of research in control, automation, and pattern recognition, supporting the double-blind review process.

Provides comprehensive guidelines for achieving scientific reproducibility in academic research, particularly for control systems, automation, and pattern recognition. It covers fixing environment dependencies, data handling, random seeds, and process pipelines, helping authors withstand rigorous peer review questioning and build verifiable research artifacts.

This skill guides researchers to determine if their topic fits the scope of Acta Automatica Sinica (AAS). It provides detailed boundaries for control theory, pattern recognition, robotics, and smart systems, helping authors distinguish their contribution from pure algorithms or system software, and advising on appropriate article type (Review/Paper/Short) to avoid initial rejection.

Provides comprehensive guidance for researchers deciding the optimal conference venue for Software Engineering (SE) research. It distinguishes between contributions that focus on *automation* (techniques or tools that automate SE tasks) suitable for ASE, versus those that are broad empirical findings, theoretical results, or pure ML advances, directing them to venues like ICSE, FSE, or ISSTA.

This guide provides a comprehensive checklist for evaluating Electronic Design Automation (EDA) research manuscripts for top-tier conferences like DAC. It emphasizes the necessity of using standard, recognized benchmark suites (e.g., ISPD, EPFL, TAU), comparing results against the true State-of-the-Art (SOTA), reporting full PPA metrics and runtime, and implementing ablation studies to ensure fairness, reproducibility, and generalizability, especially for ML-based methods.

A comprehensive guide for establishing research reproducibility in Electronic Design Automation (EDA). It details best practices for pinning benchmark suites, disclosing specific tool versions (open/commercial), documenting technology nodes (PDKs), and handling stochastic data flows (seeds, variance). Essential for ensuring that semiconductor design claims and ML-for-EDA results are credible and verifiable by the academic community.

A detailed model of the ACM/IEEE Design Automation Conference (DAC) research manuscript review process. This guide explains the double-blind, TPC-driven, and single-shot nature of the evaluation, emphasizing the critical balance between genuine novelty and measured Quality-of-Results (QoR). It outlines the high standards for evidence fairness, benchmark credibility, and ablation studies required for acceptance, differentiating DAC's approach from architecture and software venues.

This comprehensive guide provides a detailed audit checklist for submitting research manuscripts to major design automation conferences (e.g., DAC). It covers critical steps such as the two-stage abstract/manuscript timeline, adherence to the strict 6+1 page format, ensuring double-blind anonymization (removing all identifying metadata), declaring TPC conflicts, and mitigating common submission risks. Essential reading for researchers preparing for high-stakes academic submissions.

This comprehensive guide assists researchers and practitioners in selecting the optimal venue and track (e.g., DAC, ICCAD, ISCA) for their electronic design automation (EDA) or chip-design project. It clarifies the critical distinction between the archival Research Manuscript track and the industry-facing Engineering Track at DAC, emphasizing the need to frame contributions using measurable Quality of Results (QoR) improvements, novel algorithms, or real-world industrial lessons.