sigcomm-topic-selection
GitHub辅助判断项目是否适合ACM SIGCOMM，区分研究与经验赛道，识别核心网络机制，并将不匹配的研究引导至NSDI、MobiCom等更合适的会议，避免误投。
Trigger Scenarios
Install
npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill sigcomm-topic-selection -g -y
SKILL.md
Frontmatter
{
"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 project | Better-fit venue | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Networked-systems build with heavy implementation, USENIX-style | NSDI | Design-and-implementation focus; two deadlines a year |
| Mobile, wireless, or physical-layer / RF mechanism | MobiCom (or SIGMOBILE venues) | Over-the-air and device evidence is that community's core |
| Solid networking result, but incremental for the flagship | CoNEXT | SIGCOMM's sister venue for strong but narrower contributions |
| Pure Internet/traffic measurement with no new mechanism | IMC | Measurement-methodology venue; SIGCOMM wants measurement to motivate a mechanism |
| Performance modeling / analysis as the contribution | SIGMETRICS | Analytical and evaluation-method emphasis |
| OS/storage/distributed-systems core, networking secondary | OSDI / SOSP | Systems-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>
Version History
- 9f86f09 Current 2026-07-19 17:35
