本文へ移動
cccskills
無料GitHub で公開

acmmm-workflow

Use when planning the end-to-end ACM MM (ACM Multimedia) campaign calendar — from thematic-area scoping and track choice, through the April OpenReview abstract/paper/supplement chain, the June anonymous rebuttal, the July decision, the August camera-ready, and the November presentation in Rio, with the right skill invoked at each stage.

インストール方法を見る

含まれるファイル(1)

  • SKILL.md4.6 KB

SKILL.md(原文)

インストールする前に、エージェントに与えられる指示の中身を確認できます。

ACM MM Workflow

Use this to run an ACM Multimedia submission as a scheduled campaign rather than a deadline scramble. The SIGMM calendar has a long gap between the April submission chain and the July decision, so the work clusters at the front and the back.

The ACM MM calendar (2026 anchors, AoE)

Phase2026 dateWhat must be trueSkill
Scope + track choicepre-MarchContribution is cross-modal; thematic area and track chosenacmmm-topic-selection
Draft + evidenceMarchFirst page leads with the multimedia claim; ablations plannedacmmm-writing-style, acmmm-experiments
AbstractMar 25Abstract registered in OpenReviewacmmm-submission
PaperApr 16–8 sigconf pages, anonymous, final PDFacmmm-submission
SupplementApr 8Media/appendix package, anonymous, playsacmmm-supplementary
Rebuttal~Jun 4Anonymous response, small confirmatory resultsacmmm-author-response
Notification~early JulDecision + tieracmmm-review-process
Camera-ready~Aug 6De-anonymized ACM version, artifact releasedacmmm-camera-ready
ConferenceNov 10–14Registered; media-ready talk/posteracmmm-camera-ready

Treat these dates as the 2026 snapshot; reopen the current site each cycle. Note the 2026 notification date was listed inconsistently (July 7 on the CFP vs. July 9 elsewhere).

Front-loaded work (before April)

The April chain is unforgiving because three deadlines land in eight days. Do the slow work early:

  • Lock the thematic area and track — they set format and blinding, and switching late is expensive.
  • Build the cross-modal evidence: matched baselines and the leave-one-modality-out ablation that proves the fusion matters.
  • Plan any user study now; recruiting raters cannot be done in the final week.
  • Draft so the first page already leads with the multimedia contribution.

The three-deadline sprint

T-14d: freeze claims; media assets rendering from scripts
T-7d:  body fits 6-8 sigconf pages; references on overflow pages only
Mar 25: abstract registered (do not miss the earliest deadline)
Apr 1:  paper PDF final, anonymous, metadata-clean
Apr 8:  supplement packaged, anonymous, media plays for a stranger

The long gap and the rebuttal

Between April and June, prepare the confirmatory experiments a reviewer is likely to ask for (the missing baseline, the extra ablation) so the June rebuttal is a matter of reporting results, not scrambling to run them.

Back end (July–November)

  • On acceptance, de-anonymize, complete ACM rights/CCS, and release the public artifact.
  • Register early and plan travel to Rio; visas and international logistics are the usual failure.
  • Build a presentation that plays the media — the seam between modalities should be seen/heard, not just described.
  • On rejection, use the reviews to re-target: MM Asia, ICMR, a workshop, or next year's MM.

Risk register

RiskWhere it bitesMitigation
Missing the abstract deadlineMar 25 forecloses the paperRegister the abstract days early
Wrong track blindingDesk rejectConfirm the track call before formatting
Fusion not shown to matterReviews / rebuttalRun the leave-one-modality-out ablation pre-submission
User study not recruited in timePerceptual claim unbackedStart recruiting before April
Broken anonymous media linkLost evidence in reviewTest the mirror from a clean machine
Rio travel/visa delayCannot presentStart visa paperwork at acceptance

Re-targeting after a rejection

An ACM MM rejection is not the end of the work. Match the reviews to the next move: a retrieval-leaning paper can go to ICMR; a systems-leaning one to MMSys; a regionally scoped or earlier-stage result to ACM Multimedia Asia or a workshop; a matured version to the ACM TOMM journal or next year's ACM MM. Fix the decisive critique — usually the cross-modal-significance one — before resubmitting anywhere.

Output format

[Current phase] <scope/draft/abstract/paper/supplement/rebuttal/decision/camera-ready/conference>
[On track?] yes / at-risk: <what slips>
[Next deadline] <date + deliverable>
[Active skill] <which skill to run now>
[Risks] <ordered>

レビュー

まだレビューはありません。使ってみた感想をお寄せください。

同じリポジトリのスキル

概要と使いどころ

Use when packaging AAAI code, data, multimedia appendices, technical appendices, reproducibility evidence, and post-acceptance artifact releases without violating double-blind or immutable-supplement rules.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills1,2482026年9月27日 更新

Use when drafting an AAAI author response (rebuttal) under the single short character-limited author-feedback window, the no-URL rule, no-new-results guidance, AI-generated-review handling, and the AAAI two-phase review process where Phase-2 papers receive one feedback round before SPC/AC discussion.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills1,2482026年9月27日 更新

Use when preparing an accepted AAAI paper for camera-ready source submission to AAAI Press, including proceedings page limits, two-column template compliance, copyright transfer, purchased extra technical pages, deanonymization, registration, oral or poster presentation, and final public artifact release.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills1,2482026年9月27日 更新

Use when designing or auditing AAAI experiments for the broad-AI program committee, including baselines, ablations, statistical significance, robustness, human evaluation, AI-for-Social-Impact and alignment/safety evidence, compute and cost reporting, and reproducibility-checklist alignment for Phase-1 survival.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills1,2482026年9月27日 更新

Use when positioning an AAAI paper's novelty against archival work, contemporaneous arXiv or workshop papers, and AAAI/IJCAI/NeurIPS/ICML/ICLR neighbors across the broad AI scope, while staying inside AAAI's dual-submission and AI-as-source policy constraints and writing a related-work section legible to non-specialist reviewers.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills1,2482026年9月27日 更新

Use when strengthening an AAAI paper's reproducibility checklist (placed after references), experimental traceability, seed and hyperparameter reporting, compute and cost disclosure, dataset access and licensing, code/data ZIP readiness, and the claim-to-evidence map that Phase-1 reviewers use to judge rigor across AAAI's broad AI scope.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills1,2482026年9月27日 更新

brycewang-stanford のスキルをすべて見る

このスキルの問題を報告する