Skip to content
Back to skills

Fse Supplementary

ASecurity

Use when deciding what belongs in an ESEC/FSE paper body versus its anonymized artifact and appendices, covering the ACM-template page budget, the rule that decision-critical evidence stays inside the reviewed pages, double-anonymous supplementary material, and how to split an empirical-SE paper between body and package.

  • 3 stars
  • 0 votes
  • 0 copies
  • 3 views
  • Added September 12, 2026
ai-agentsgogit

Security analysis

A100/100

Scanned September 12, 2026

npx -y skills add thedixitjain/the-mega-skill-library --skill fse-supplementary --agent claude-code

Installs into .claude/skills of the current project.

Are you the author of Fse Supplementary?

Add the live security badge to your README. It updates with every re-scan.

Security grade badge for Fse Supplementary
[![Security: A — Skills Directory](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/api/skills/thedixitjain-fse-supplementary/badge)](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/thedixitjain-fse-supplementary)

More formats (shields.io, HTML) on the badges page. Keep it an A: scan every change in CI with Pro.

Download with Pro
SKILL.md
---
name: fse-supplementary
description: "Use when deciding what belongs in an ESEC/FSE paper body versus its anonymized artifact and appendices, covering the ACM-template page budget, the rule that decision-critical evidence stays inside the reviewed pages, double-anonymous supplementary material, and how to split an empirical-SE paper between body and package."
category: business-and-finance
source_repo: brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills
source_path: "FSE-Skills/skills/fse-supplementary/SKILL.md"
source_url: https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills/blob/HEAD/FSE-Skills/skills/fse-supplementary/SKILL.md
---


# FSE Supplementary

Use this when assembling FSE supplementary material. The governing rule is simple and strict:
**the paper must be judgeable from the reviewed pages alone.** The artifact and any appendix
support the paper; they do not hold the argument. Reviewers read the artifact at their discretion,
so anything the decision depends on lives in the body.

## What goes where

| Content | Body (within page budget) | Artifact / appendix |
|---|---|---|
| Research questions and their answers | Yes | — |
| Core technique or study design | Yes | Full parameter grids, extra config |
| The headline results and their threats | Yes | Full result tables, secondary plots |
| Statistical tests behind a claim | The result + test named | The computation notebook |
| Subject-system list | Summary + selection criterion | The complete list |
| Raw data, logs, scripts | — | Yes |
| Reproduction instructions | A pointer | The README and run scripts |

If a reviewer would need to open the artifact to know whether to accept, the paper is
mis-partitioned — move that evidence into the body.

## The page-budget discipline

FSE's ACM-template budget (FSE 2027: ≤18 pages of text and figures, plus reference pages) is
generous compared with a two-column conference limit, but it is finite and counts figures, tables,
and any in-paper appendix. Consequences:

- You can usually keep a full threats-to-validity treatment and the primary result tables **in the
  body** — do so; they are decision-critical.
- Long protocol tables, per-subject breakdowns, and additional RQ variants go to the artifact with
  explicit forward references.
- Do not use the artifact to smuggle in a result that would not fit — an argument that only closes
  with material outside the reviewed pages reads as unreviewable.

## Double-anonymous supplementary rules

```text
[No identity]   no authors, affiliations, acknowledgements, grants, cluster paths, or repo owners
                anywhere in the archive or appendix
[Anonymized links] the Data Availability link points at an anonymizing host, not a personal repo
[Clean archive]  no .git history, .DS_Store, credentials, caches, or large irrelevant files
[Opens clean]    verify the archive unzips and the README orients a reader in one minute on a
                fresh machine
```

## Appendix architecture (when the template allows in-paper appendices)

- Order appendix sections to mirror the RQ order; reviewers navigate by RQ, not page number.
- Keep each appendix section referenced from the body at least once — orphaned material is invisible
  under discretionary review.
- Confirm on the current call whether appendices count against the page budget or attach
  separately; this varies and changes the split.

## Vignette: splitting a mixed-methods paper

A paper mining pull requests plus interviewing developers: the body keeps the RQs, the study
design, the headline quantitative results with effect sizes, the key qualitative themes, and a
threats subsection; the artifact holds the mining scripts with pinned SHAs, the extracted dataset,
the full codebook with inter-rater agreement, the interview protocol, and the analysis notebooks.
Nothing decision-critical lives only in the artifact, because artifact inspection is discretionary
and the reviewers judge from the pages.

## Output format

```text
[Supplement status] ready / needs fixes / not ready
[Partition check] anything decision-critical outside the body? <none / move: what>
[Page budget] body within limit? appendices counted correctly? yes/no
[Anonymity] archive clean of identity + metadata? passed/issues
[Body dependency] <what a reviewer can decide without opening the artifact>
```

---

**Source:** [`brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills`](https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills) → `FSE-Skills/skills/fse-supplementary/SKILL.md`

Attribution

Is this your skill, or is something wrong with this listing? Request removal or report an issue. Author removals are honored within 72 hours.

Comments

Loading comments…

Newsletter

Get the weekly list of safe new skills, and the ones we pulled.