L’interface est localisée ; les présentations et documents des Skills sont traduits automatiquement par IA dans votre langue. Le code, les commandes, chemins et termes techniques restent en version originale, et le document de l’auteur fait foi.
Explorer les Skills
Données et recherche · SKILL.md

sigcomm-topic-selection

sigcomm-topic-selection

Use when deciding whether a project is a strong ACM SIGCOMM fit, choosing the research versus experience track, identifying the networking-stack mechanism at the core of the contribution, and routing misfits to NSDI, MobiCom, CoNEXT, IMC, SIGMETRICS, or a systems venue before writing begins.

Independent GitHub snapshot · Automated classification · Original documentation governs

Documentation de la Skill

GitHub

name: sigcomm-topic-selection description: Use when deciding whether a project is a strong ACM SIGCOMM fit, choosing the research versus experience track, identifying the networking-stack mechanism at the core of the contribution, and routing misfits to NSDI, MobiCom, CoNEXT, IMC, SIGMETRICS, or a systems venue before writing begins.

SIGCOMM Topic Selection

Use this before writing, and before committing the single yearly deadline. SIGCOMM is the broad networking flagship: it rewards a contribution to the design, measurement, or analysis of networks and communication systems that is stated as a mechanism or architecture and proven under realistic conditions. Reopen the current CFP's topic list before final routing — emphasis drifts between editions.

Fit test

  • Prefer SIGCOMM when the contribution is a networking-stack idea — a protocol, transport or congestion mechanism, routing or forwarding architecture, data-center or wide-area fabric, programmable-data-plane technique, network measurement result, or systems-for-networking design — with evaluation on a testbed, trace, or deployment.
  • The bar is a principle that travels, not a tuned deployment. A single-site tuning win with no generalizable mechanism reads as under-contribution here even if the numbers are good.
  • Both tracks live under this bar: research wants design novelty and depth; experience wants lessons only real operation at scale can teach.

Where else the work might belong

Signal in the projectBetter-fit venueWhy
Networked-systems build with heavy implementation, USENIX-styleNSDIDesign-and-implementation focus; two deadlines a year
Mobile, wireless, or physical-layer / RF mechanismMobiCom (or SIGMOBILE venues)Over-the-air and device evidence is that community's core
Solid networking result, but incremental for the flagshipCoNEXTSIGCOMM's sister venue for strong but narrower contributions
Pure Internet/traffic measurement with no new mechanismIMCMeasurement-methodology venue; SIGCOMM wants measurement to motivate a mechanism
Performance modeling / analysis as the contributionSIGMETRICSAnalytical and evaluation-method emphasis
OS/storage/distributed-systems core, networking secondaryOSDI / SOSPSystems-first framing

The routing that trips people up

SIGCOMM and NSDI overlap heavily, and authors agonize over the split. A workable heuristic: if the paper's spine is a networking abstraction, protocol, or measurement-driven design argument, it leans SIGCOMM; if the spine is a built-and-deployed system whose value is in the engineering and implementation, it leans NSDI. Neither is a rule — strong papers cross the line both ways — but the single SIGCOMM deadline means a misroute costs a year, so decide deliberately. IMC is the other frequent confusion: a measurement paper needs a mechanism or a design implication to be SIGCOMM rather than IMC.

Vignette: where a congestion-control result goes

A project proposes a new congestion signal and shows it cuts tail flow-completion time on a data-center testbed. SIGCOMM reading: strong fit — a transport mechanism with tail evidence under realistic traffic is the house genre (compare DCTCP and pFabric in the exemplars). Strip the mechanism and keep only a measurement of how badly today's schemes behave, and it drifts toward IMC; rebuild it as a fully implemented, deployed RPC stack whose contribution is the system, and NSDI becomes competitive. Same core, three homes.

Sharpening moves before committing

  • Name the mechanism in one sentence: the protocol change, the architectural shift, or the measured invariant. If no mechanism exists, the SIGCOMM framing does not exist either.
  • Decide the track honestly and early; the experience track is a strength for real deployments, not a demotion.
  • Confirm the evaluation can reach testbed, trace, or deployment evidence, not simulation only; simulation-only fabric claims are a quiet fit failure at this venue.
  • Weigh the one-deadline cost: if the result is a year from convincing, plan the year rather than gambling the single February slot.

Output format

[Fit] strong SIGCOMM / possible SIGCOMM / better elsewhere
[Track] research / experience / n-a
[Best venue] SIGCOMM / NSDI / MobiCom / CoNEXT / IMC / SIGMETRICS / other
[Mechanism sentence] <one sentence naming the networking contribution>
[Top rejection risk] <novelty / evidence realism / measurement-only / scope>
[Next action] <mechanism, evaluation, framing, or venue switch>
Skills enregistrées