Agent Skills
› brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills
› acm-sigir-conference-on-research-and-development-in-information-retrieval
acm-sigir-conference-on-research-and-development-in-information-retrieval
GitHub针对ACM SIGIR会议的投稿适配与评估工具，涵盖领域契合度、证据标准、重写策略及拒稿风险诊断。用于判断论文是否适合该检索旗舰会议，并提供框架调整建议。
Trigger Scenarios
作者指定SIGIR为目标会议
需评估信息检索类手稿的会议契合度
需将期刊或arXiv风格重构为会议叙事
需要证据缺口、匿名性或反驳策略诊断
Install
npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill acm-sigir-conference-on-research-and-development-in-information-retrieval -g -y
SKILL.md
Frontmatter
{
"name": "acm-sigir-conference-on-research-and-development-in-information-retrieval",
"description": "Use when targeting ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval (SIGIR) or deciding whether a computer-science manuscript fits this venue. Encodes conference fit, framing, evidence bar, submission-cycle checks, rebuttal posture, and desk-reject risks for information retrieval flagship."
}
ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval (SIGIR)
Conference positioning
ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval (SIGIR) is a top computer-science conference venue for information retrieval, search, ranking, recommendation, evaluation, conversational search, and retrieval-augmented systems. It rewards an IR paper with strong ranking baselines, test collections, and measurement validity. Treat this skill as a fit / venue-selection / re-framing tool for conference submission strategy, not as a substitute for the current year's CFP, author kit, ethics policy, or submission portal.
Because CS conferences change deadlines, templates, page limits, review workflow, artifact rules, AI-use policy, and rebuttal formats every cycle, always verify the live official instructions before making a submission-ready recommendation. Start from the official source anchor recorded for this venue in ../../resources/conference-roster.md and ../../resources/official-source-map.md.
When to trigger
- The author names SIGIR / ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval as the target venue.
- A manuscript in information retrieval needs a conference-fit read before being formatted or submitted.
- The paper must be re-framed from journal style or arXiv style into a selective CS conference narrative.
- The author needs an evidence-gap, anonymity, artifact, rebuttal, or re-routing diagnosis for this venue.
Scope & topic fit
- Core fit: information retrieval, search, ranking, recommendation, evaluation, conversational search, and retrieval-augmented systems.
- Best submissions make a precise contribution type visible: algorithm, theorem, system, dataset, benchmark, empirical finding, design artifact, tool, or socio-technical analysis.
- The paper should explain why the result matters to SIGIR's reviewers, not just why it is interesting to the authors' lab or product context.
- Position related work against the most recent conference-cycle papers in this venue and its closest siblings; stale comparisons are a common early-review weakness.
- If the contribution is interdisciplinary, state which part is CS research and which part is domain evidence.
Venue-specific calibration
- Reviewer lens: Treat SIGIR as a information retrieval flagship venue whose reviewers expect the scope and evidence to match its own community. Do not submit a generic CS paper until the introduction names the exact subcommunity, contribution type, and proof or empirical standard.
- Contribution hook to foreground: the venue-specific contribution bar.
- Scope vocabulary to use naturally in the abstract and introduction: information retrieval, search, ranking, recommendation, evaluation, conversational search, and retrieval-augmented systems.
- Distinctive fingerprint for reviewer calibration: information, retrieval, search, ranking, recommendation, evaluation, conversational, retrieval-augmented, venue-specific, contribution, flagship, sigir.
- Official anchor domain: sigir.org. Quote annual rules only after opening that source and the current-year CFP/author kit.
Close-neighbor routing guardrail
- Route to SIGIR when the core contribution is information retrieval: ranking, search, evaluation, recommendation-adjacent retrieval, user search behavior, or retrieval systems.
- Compare ECIR for European IR, CHIIR for interactive IR, CIKM for broader information/knowledge management, and NLP venues for language-method contributions.
What distinguishes this venue from its closest siblings
- What SIGIR is. The ACM SIGIR flagship for information retrieval — ranking, retrieval models, recommendation, and evaluation.
- vs ECIR / CIKM / CHIIR. ECIR is the European IR conference; CIKM blends IR+KM+databases; CHIIR is interactive/user-side IR. SIGIR is the top general-IR venue.
- vs TREC. TREC is an evaluation campaign (NIST test collections/shared tasks), not a paper conference — cite TREC for benchmarks, submit research to SIGIR.
Method & evidence bar
- Use task-appropriate baselines, multiple datasets or languages when the claim is broad, and error analysis that explains model behavior.
- For LLM work, control for data leakage, prompt sensitivity, evaluation contamination, and human-evaluation reliability.
- For resources, document annotation, licensing, demographics, quality control, and intended use.
- For SIGIR, the evidence must support the venue-specific signature: an IR paper with strong ranking baselines, test collections, and measurement validity.
- Include limitations, negative results, compute/resource reporting, data provenance, and ethics details when they affect the claim.
Structure & house style
- State the language phenomenon, task, or system behavior before the model name.
- Connect examples to measured errors; reviewers dislike anecdotal examples presented as evidence.
- Use the current official template exactly; do not guess page limits, font sizes, supplement rules, anonymity exceptions, or camera-ready requirements from old cycles.
- The introduction should answer: problem, why now, what is new, why this venue, and what evidence proves the claim.
- Put the strongest result in the main paper, not only in the appendix or supplement; reviewers should not have to reconstruct the contribution.
Official-cycle checklist
- Open the live official venue page: https://sigir.org/
- Re-check the current cycle's CFP, author kit, submission system, abstract/paper deadlines, page limits, supplementary-material rules, anonymity policy, dual-submission policy, ethics policy, AI-use policy, artifact/code/data expectations, rebuttal/author-response format, and camera-ready requirements.
- Confirm the review workflow and portal: OpenReview / CMT / HotCRP / PCS / START or society portal, as specified for the current cycle.
- Check whether accepted papers require in-person presentation, separate registration, artifact badges, proceedings copyright, or post-acceptance release forms.
- If the live official instructions conflict with this skill, the official instructions win.
Pre-submission self-check
- One sentence states why this manuscript belongs at SIGIR, using the venue's scope rather than generic "top conference" language.
- The claim is calibrated to the evidence: no broader than the datasets, proofs, systems, user studies, deployments, or threat model support.
- Related work includes the nearest current-cycle information retrieval flagship papers and explains the technical delta.
- The paper satisfies the current official template, anonymity, ethics, artifact, and rebuttal requirements.
- The main paper is self-contained enough for reviewers to evaluate novelty and correctness without hunting through external links.
Common desk-reject triggers
- Evaluation that is only a prompt table or cherry-picked generation examples.
- Missing dataset documentation, licensing, or annotation reliability.
- Claims of general language understanding from narrow English-only benchmarks.
- Formatting, anonymity, dual-submission, external-link, or supplement violations under the current-year policy.
- A contribution framed for a neighboring field while giving SIGIR reviewers too little technical or empirical substance.
Re-routing decision
If the paper misses SIGIR's bar, compare against annual-meeting-of-the-association-for-computational-linguistics / conference-on-empirical-methods-in-natural-language-processing / north-american-chapter-of-the-association-for-computational-linguistics / european-chapter-of-the-association-for-computational-linguistics. Re-route based on contribution type, not prestige: theory to a theory venue, systems to a systems venue, application-heavy work to a domain venue, and early ideas to workshops or shorter tracks when the official CFP supports them.
Output format
[Fit] High / Medium / Low (one-line reason)
[Target] ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval (SIGIR)
[Contribution type] algorithm / theory / system / dataset / benchmark / empirical / design / security / other
[Main evidence gap] <single most important missing proof, experiment, study, artifact, or policy check>
[Official items to re-check] CFP / author kit / deadline / format / anonymity / ethics / AI-use / artifact / rebuttal / camera-ready
[Top rejection risk] <venue-specific risk>
[Re-route suggestion] <better-matched conference or journal if not a fit>
Version History
- 1839142 Current 2026-07-05 12:40
