focs-artifact-evaluation
Use when planning the durable evidence objects around a FOCS (IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science) paper — a venue with no artifact track where the public arXiv/ECCC full version is the artifact of record, plus proof certificates, checker code, and the IEEE Xplore version's supporting role.
Profile →npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill focs-artifact-evaluation --agent claude-code
Same command for any agent — swap --agent for codex, cursor, copilot.
Weekly change comes from our own snapshots, not the repository page — it measures attention, not adoption.
# FOCS Artifact Evaluation There is no artifact-evaluation committee, badge system, or code-submission channel at FOCS — the 2026 CFP contains none of that machinery (checked 2026-07-08). What it does contain is an expectation with teeth: authors of accepted papers are expected to make full versions, with complete proofs, publicly available by the camera-ready deadline. Read that as the venue's actual artifact policy. The proceedings entry in IEEE Xplore is the citable announcement; the public full version is the object the community will actually consult, teach from, and check. Plan the evidence around that split from day one, not after acceptance. ## The FOCS evidence inventory | Object | Host | Audience | Obligation level | |---|---|---|---| | Full version with all proofs | arXiv (cs.DS/cs.CC/quant-ph...) or ECCC | Referees (they look, even under double-blind), then everyone | Expected by camera-ready; wise at submission time | | Proceedings version | IEEE Xplore / IEEE CS Digital Library | Citation graph, indexing | Required deliverable of acceptance | | Certificates for computed proof steps | Ancillary files beside the full version | Skeptics re-verifying a machine-checked lem
- The FOCS evidence inventory
- Packaging a certificate that strangers can trust
- Version ledger: keeping three documents honest
- What not to build
- Formalization claims, calibrated
- Choosing the host: arXiv vs ECCC
- Planning sequence
Everything a verifier needs, content-addressed and self-describing
mkdir lemma47-certificate
cp check_lemma47.py configs.enum README-VERIFY.md lemma47-certificate/
sha256sum lemma47-certificate/* > lemma47-certificate/SHA256SUMS
git tag -a focs2026-submitted -m "state at FOCS submission"
README-VERIFY.md states: input, claim certified, expected output,
runtime (~90 s), and environment ("Python 3.12, stdlib only")What does the focs-artifact-evaluation skill do?
Use when planning the durable evidence objects around a FOCS (IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science) paper — a venue with no artifact track where the public arXiv/ECCC full version is the artifact of record, plus proof certificates, checker code, and the IEEE Xplore version's supporting role.
How do I install it?
Run `npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill focs-artifact-evaluation --agent claude-code` — it drops the skill into your project so the agent can pick it up. Swap the --agent value for codex, cursor or copilot if you use one of those.
Where does this skill come from?
From brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills, a repository with 984 stars. We read it straight from the repository tree rather than a submitted listing, so what you see here is what is actually published.
Is a popular skill a good skill?
Not necessarily. Stars measure attention, not adoption — a repository can trend for a week and be abandoned. That is why we show the weekly change from our own snapshots next to the total, instead of a single flattering number.