Individual skill
nsdi-experiments
Use when designing or auditing the evaluation of an NSDI submission — choosing traces, testbeds, and deployment evidence, sizing scale and failure-injection experiments, picking baselines that fight back, and reporting tail behavior so networked-systems reviewers can see where the design wins, loses, and breaks.
NSDI-Skills/skills/nsdi-experiments/SKILL.md
Source commit 932eb23331721b16e967c59f093781be1928b498
What was checked
- Matches the observed repository HEAD
- Yes
- Scanner rules are current
- No
- Repository scan complete
- No
- Skill scan complete
- No
- 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
- design Derived category
Files and excerpt
File metadata and permitted, redacted excerpts come from the recorded scan. Source links are pinned to that commit.
Read excerpt
# NSDI Experiments
NSDI's phrase is "practical evaluation," and its reviewer culture decodes that as:
realistic traffic, honest baselines, visible tails, and at least one experiment where
the system is *hurt on purpose*. Design the evaluation as a set of questions the
paper must answer, then build the smallest experiment matrix that answers them.
## The evidence ladder
Climb as high as the project honestly can, and say plainly which rung you are on:
1. **Synthetic microbenchmarks** — isolate mechanism costs. Necessary, never
sufficient; a microbenchmark-only evaluation reads as a workshop draft.
2. **Trace-driven or production-derived workloads on a testbed** — the venue's