Individual skill

sigmetrics-writing-style

Use when revising an ACM SIGMETRICS paper for a rigorously stated performance contribution on the first page, explicit modeling assumptions and their validity, theorems paired with numerical/empirical validation, evidence proportional to the claim, double-anonymous wording, and disciplined use of the 20-page single-column acmsmall budget.

SIGMETRICS-Skills/skills/sigmetrics-writing-style/SKILL.md

Read pinned source

Source commit 932eb23331721b16e967c59f093781be1928b498

What was checked

Matches the observed repository HEAD: Yes
Scanner rules are current: No
Repository scan complete: No
Skill scan complete: Yes
Observed behavior: Not checked yet
Last checked: Nov 9, 2026

These are observations at the recorded commit, not a guarantee of safety. Review the source before running it.

Install this skill

Choose an agent in your Stack or copy a command below. Commands fetch the pinned commit and copy only this skill directory. Existing destinations are refused. Copying a command does not install anything.

An install command is unavailable: current rules, complete repository and skill scans, an eligible behavior level and a permitted license are required.

Repository context

Repository stars (not skill ratings): 1,409
Repository last updated: Sep 27, 2026
License: MIT

Observed agent integration: No specific integration evidence. Standard SKILL.md installation does not imply verified compatibility.

academic-writing Repository topic
agent-skills Repository topic
journal Repository topic
academic-research Repository topic
ai-agents Repository topic
anthropic Repository topic
awesome-list Repository topic
claude Repository topic
claude-code Repository topic
economics Repository topic
writing Derived category

Files and excerpt

File metadata and permitted, redacted excerpts come from the recorded scan. Source links are pinned to that commit.

Browse files

SKILL.mdcore · 5,685 bytes

Read excerpt


# SIGMETRICS Writing Style

Use this when revising the main paper. SIGMETRICS papers are POMACS journal articles read by
performance-evaluation specialists, so they need a **precise performance contribution stated on the
first page** and claims a reviewer can *check*. The failure this skill prevents is a paper that
reads like a systems demo (numbers, no model) or a theory paper with no systems relevance
(theorems, no validation).

## Revision rules

- **Lead with the performance contribution, stated rigorously:** the systems-performance problem, a
  precise metric (mean vs. tail latency, throughput, regret, energy), why current models/policies
  fall short, the contribution (a model, policy, methodology — ideally with a proven bound), the
  validation, and what changes for real systems.