Skill UI

This guide provides a detailed strategy for authors responding to reviewers' comments (R&R or reject-and-resubmit) for top-tier academic journals, particularly in finance and econometrics. It teaches systematic methods for structuring the rebuttal letter, addressing measurement artifacts, managing endogeneity concerns, and maintaining the transparency of core results to maximize acceptance chances.

A comprehensive guide for researchers preparing manuscripts for top-tier financial journals. It teaches advanced strategies for conducting a pre-submission pre-mortem, anticipating specific econometric objections (e.g., endogeneity, measurement artifacts), and systematically triaging reviewer feedback (fatal, fixable, defensible). Ideal for improving research robustness and maximizing acceptance chances.

A comprehensive guide for developing and defending research methodologies for top-tier academic journals, such as the Journal of Management Information Systems (JMIS). It details how to properly design studies—whether they involve econometrics, behavioral experiments, or design-science artifacts—to establish credible causal identification and meet scholarly rigor, while adhering to strict manuscript length limits.

A comprehensive guide for authors submitting to the Journal of Software (JOS), clarifying the current status and best practices for including reusable code and data artifacts. It distinguishes JOS's approach from mandatory international conference badging systems, focusing instead on making reproducibility a strong, proactive addition to your submission.

A comprehensive guide for researchers preparing system artifacts for major conferences like OSDI. It outlines best practices for structuring deliverables, ensuring permanent and resolvable archiving (e.g., using Zenodo/DOI), and maximizing reproducibility. The guide emphasizes meeting the current academic standard for verifiable and functional system submissions.

A comprehensive guide for researchers to determine the optimal academic venue (e.g., PODS, SIGMOD, VLDB, ICDT) for their paper. The guide helps distinguish between contributions that are foundational theorems (theory) and those that are performance-measured systems artifacts, ensuring proper scope definition before submission.

A comprehensive guide for converting an anonymized academic submission into the final, polished camera-ready version for ACM proceedings. Details systematic de-anonymization, mandatory ACM rights/metadata completion (eRights, CCS Concepts), permanent DOI linking for artifacts, and critical production checks required for two-column acmart formatting.

A comprehensive guide on preparing and structuring evidence packages for recommender system research, especially for academic submissions. It details how to ensure that all ranking claims, off-policy estimates, and evaluation metrics are end-to-end reproducible by providing artifacts like datasets, split scripts, model checkpoints, and propensity logs in an anonymous, verifiable repository.

This guide is designed for systematic reviews and meta-analyses, providing a rigorous framework to stress-test the robustness and completeness of reported findings. It mandates advanced checks such as saturation evidence, risk-of-bias appraisal, and statistical diagnostics (e.g., heterogeneity, publication bias) to ensure conclusions are not artifacts of omission or methodological weakness. Essential for high-level academic research.

This guide outlines essential strategies for ensuring that complex physical or scientific measurements are fully reproducible by external parties, long after the original testbed is decommissioned. It mandates capturing detailed provenance data, including energy measurement methods, hardware specifications, firmware toolchains, environmental conditions, and ground-truth protocols, thus transforming raw data into verifiable, sharable scientific artifacts.

This guide details the comprehensive steps required after an ACM conference paper has been accepted. It covers critical stages including obtaining shepherd approval, de-anonymizing the work (restoring author names, funding, and system details), reflowing the paper using the acmart template, and submitting both the source code and the final PDF through the ACM Publishing System (TAPS). It emphasizes releasing public artifacts for reproducibility.

A comprehensive guide detailing how to construct the critical 'one-shot revision letter' for SIGMETRICS submissions. This process requires transforming the response into a systematic 'change ledger,' ensuring every required change from the reviewers' list is explicitly addressed, justified, or demonstrably resolved in the revised paper or accompanying artifacts. Essential for authors aiming for conference acceptance.