sigcomm-reproducibility
GitHub用于强化ACM SIGCOMM论文的可复现性证据。涵盖拓扑、流量、配置和运行记录的账本管理，确保结果可重建、统计一致且法律合规，提升评审信任度。
Trigger Scenarios
Install
npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill sigcomm-reproducibility -g -y
SKILL.md
Frontmatter
{
"name": "sigcomm-reproducibility",
"description": "Use when strengthening the reproducibility evidence of an ACM SIGCOMM paper — topology and testbed ledgers, traffic workload and trace provenance, configuration and version pinning, tail-percentile run counts and variance, legal data-release decisions, and consistency between the paper's claims and the artifact that backs them."
}
SIGCOMM Reproducibility
Use this before submission and again before the artifact deadline. SIGCOMM's culture treats a result as a claim a stranger should be able to rebuild; reproducibility here is largely about whether the network conditions behind a number are recorded well enough to recreate. Reopen the current Call for Artifacts to confirm the process for this edition.
Evidence map
- Map each reported number to a rebuildable location: a script, a logged run, a config, and the figure it feeds.
- For every measurement, record the topology (physical or emulated), the traffic (workload generator or trace, with provenance), the configuration (every parameter), and the environment (kernel, NIC, switch firmware, data-plane toolchain).
- For any stochastic result, report the run count, the seed or workload driver, and the variance behind each percentile — a lone 99th-percentile number with no replication is not reproducible.
- Decide early what can legally ship: production traces and topologies often cannot, so plan a substitute with matching statistical character rather than discovering the block at the deadline.
- Keep the paper and the artifact consistent; a figure the artifact cannot regenerate is a reproducibility gap reviewers and the AEC both notice.
The four ledgers
| Ledger | What it records | Failure it prevents |
|---|---|---|
| Topology | Nodes, links, capacities, buffer sizes, emulation vs. hardware | "Which topology produced Figure 6?" |
| Traffic | Workload distribution or trace, provenance, which figure used it | Numbers that cannot be tied to an input |
| Configuration | Every parameter and its value per experiment | Silent knob changes between runs |
| Run | Seeds, replication counts, timestamps, variance | Percentiles with no reproducible basis |
Maintaining these while you run is cheap; reconstructing them after the deadline is error-prone and often impossible.
Degrees of reproducibility
Turnkey : one command rebuilds each figure from logged runs on a documented setup
Scripted : scripts exist but need hardware, private data, or documented manual steps
Descriptive : prose detailed enough that a competent networker could rebuild the pipeline
Fragile : results depend on unrecorded conditions -> a red flag to fix before submission
For SIGCOMM, downscaled testbed results should be turnkey because evaluators actually run them; full-scale hardware results may stay scripted with the deviation documented. State the achieved level honestly rather than promising turnkey behavior that fails on a clean machine.
Vignette: a wide-area measurement result
A paper characterizes loss and latency on a production overlay, then proposes a routing tweak. Its reproducibility spine: the measurement window and vantage points, the sampling method, the anonymization applied before any release, a public-trace or synthetic substitute for the parts that cannot ship, and a driver that regenerates the loss-latency figures from logged samples — plus one honest sentence about which production condition the substitute cannot capture.
Legal and ethical release
- Real user or third-party-infrastructure measurement needs its handling addressed in the paper; anonymize before release and record what was removed.
- Prefer an archival host with a DOI for anything you can ship, and document the exact reason for anything you cannot.
Output format
[Claim inventory] <number -> rebuildable location>
[Ledger status] topology / traffic / configuration / run — complete or gaps
[Reproducibility level] turnkey / scripted / descriptive / fragile
[Data-release plan] shippable / substitute (+ provenance) / withheld (+ reason)
[Paper fixes] <must appear in the main PDF>
[Artifact fixes] <what the package still needs>
Version History
- 9f86f09 Current 2026-07-19 17:35
