
Systems Paper Writing
FreeStreamline your systems paper submissions with structured guidance.
Free · Opens the source repo
What Systems Paper Writing does
The Systems Paper Writing skill is designed for researchers and authors preparing papers for leading systems conferences such as OSDI, SOSP, ASPLOS, NSDI, and EuroSys. This skill provides a comprehensive framework for structuring a 10–12 page paper, offering detailed paragraph-level blueprints that guide users through each section of their manuscript. By utilizing established best practices and insights from experienced researchers, this skill helps authors allocate pages effectively and construct coherent, impactful arguments.
Included in this skill are venue-specific checklists, reviewer guidelines, and LaTeX templates tailored for various conferences. These resources simplify the writing process by ensuring that users adhere to the specific requirements and expectations of their target venues. The structural blueprints break down complex writing tasks into manageable components, allowing authors to focus on content quality while maintaining compliance with formatting and structural norms.
This skill is particularly beneficial for early-career researchers or those new to systems research, as it demystifies the writing process and provides a clear roadmap for success. It also serves as a valuable reference for seasoned authors looking to refine their writing strategy or ensure their submissions meet the rigorous standards of top-tier conferences. By following the guidance provided, users can enhance their chances of acceptance and contribute meaningfully to the field of systems research.
When to use it
Use this skill when preparing a paper for submission to systems conferences, particularly when needing guidance on structure and content.
When not to use it
This skill is not suitable for general machine learning paper writing or for authors seeking citation verification workflows.
What you can build with it
Structuring a Conference Paper
When preparing a paper for OSDI or SOSP, use this skill to follow the recommended structural blueprint.
Using LaTeX for Formatting
Access the provided LaTeX templates to ensure your paper meets the formatting requirements of your target conference.
Guidance on Reviewer Expectations
Refer to the reviewer guidelines included in this skill to understand what reviewers look for in systems papers.
How to install Systems Paper Writing
View source1. Install with the skills CLI
npx skills add orchestra-research/ai-research-skills/systems-paper-writing --agent claude-code2. Or install it manually
Download the skill folder and drop it into ~/.claude/skills/ for all projects, or .claude/skills/ to scope it to one repo. Restart Claude Code so it picks up the new skill.
Anthropic's agentic coding CLI, and the reference implementation of Agent Skills. Drop a skill folder into ~/.claude/skills and Claude Code loads it automatically whenever a task matches the skill's description. Claude Code docs
Inside SKILL.md
Written by orchestra-researchSystems Paper Writing: Paragraph-Level Structural Blueprint
Fine-grained structural guidance for writing 10–12 page systems papers targeting top systems venues: OSDI, SOSP, ASPLOS, NSDI, and EuroSys. This skill provides page allocation per section, paragraph-level blueprints, and writing patterns distilled from authoritative guides and best-paper analysis.
When to Use This Skill
| Scenario | Use This Skill | Use ml-paper-writing Instead |
|---|---|---|
| Structuring a 12-page OSDI/SOSP paper | ✅ | |
| Page budget and paragraph planning | ✅ | |
| Systems-specific evaluation structure | ✅ | |
| General ML paper writing philosophy | ✅ | |
| Citation verification workflow | ✅ | |
| LaTeX templates and formatting | ✅ | |
| NeurIPS/ICML/ICLR paper structure | ✅ |
Boundary: ml-paper-writing provides general writing philosophy, multi-venue templates, and citation verification. This skill focuses exclusively on paragraph-level structural blueprints for systems conferences.
Authoritative Sources
This blueprint synthesizes guidance from established systems researchers:
- Levin & Redell — "How (and How Not) to Write a Good Systems Paper" (SOSP'83 PC Chairs, USENIX/ACM SIGOPS)
- Irene Zhang (MSR/UW) — "Hints on how to write an SOSP paper" (SOSP/OSDI PC)
- Gernot Heiser (UNSW, seL4) — Style Guide + Paper Writing Talk
- Timothy Roscoe (ETH Zürich) — "Writing reviews for systems conferences"
- Mike Dahlin (UT Austin/Google) — "Giving a Conference Talk"
- Yi Ding — "How to write good systems papers?"
- hzwer & DingXiaoH — WritingAIPaper (GitHub 1.3k+ stars)
Full citations and URLs: see references/section-blueprints.md.
12-Page Systems Paper Blueprint
Overview: Page Allocation
| Section | Pages | Purpose |
|---|---|---|
| Abstract | ~0.25 | 150–250 words, 5-sentence structure |
| S1 Introduction | 1.5–2 | Problem → Gap → Insight → Contributions |
| S2 Background & Motivation | 1–1.5 | Terms + Production observations |
| S3 Design | 3–4 | Architecture + Module details + Alternatives |
| S4 Implementation | 0.5–1 | Prototype details, LOC, key engineering |
| S5 Evaluation | 3–4 | Setup + End-to-end + Microbenchmarks + Scalability |
| S6 Related Work | 1 | Grouped by methodology, explicit comparison |
| S7 Conclusion | 0.5 | 3-sentence summary |
| Total | ~12 | Submission: 12 pages strict (USENIX) / 11 pages (ACM ASPLOS). Camera-ready: up to 14 pages (USENIX) / 13 pages (ACM). Ranges above span submission through camera-ready. Target 12 pages for initial submission. References unlimited. |
Abstract (150–250 words, 5 sentences)
Sentence 1: Problem context and importance
Sentence 2: Gap in existing approaches
Sentence 3: Key insight or thesis ("X is better for Y in environment Z")
Sentence 4: Summary of approach and key results
Sentence 5: Broader impact or availability
Source: Levin & Redell — "Can you state the new idea concisely? Use them in the abstract." Irene Zhang — "The abstract is harder to write because you cannot use terms or concepts you introduced in the paper."
S1 Introduction (1.5–2 pages)
Paragraph structure:
- Problem statement (~0.5 page) — Establish the domain and why it matters. Use concrete numbers (cluster sizes, workload statistics, latency requirements).
- Gap analysis (~0.5 page) — Enumerate specific gaps G1–Gn in existing systems. Each gap is one sentence with evidence.
- Key insight (1 paragraph) — The thesis statement: "X is better for applications Y running in environment Z." (Irene Zhang formula)
- Contributions (~0.5 page) — Numbered list of 3–5 concrete contributions. Each contribution is testable and maps to a section.
Writing pattern: hzwer Move 1 (Establish territory) → Move 2 (Find niche) → Move 3 (Occupy niche).
Source: Irene Zhang — "clearly state your target environment (Z) and application (Y)" + "clearly state why previous systems do not meet the needs"; Levin & Redell — "What exactly is the problem being solved?"
S2 Background & Motivation (1–1.5 pages)
Paragraph structure:
- Technical background (~0.5 page) — Define terms and systems the reader needs. Follow Gernot Heiser's "define-before-use" principle.
- Production observations (~0.5–1 page) — Present Observation 1, 2, 3 from real data or measurements. Each observation leads to a design insight.
Source: Irene Zhang — "clearly motivate Y and Z. Why is application Y important?"; Gernot Heiser — "define-before-use."
S3 Design (3–4 pages)
Paragraph structure:
- System architecture overview (~0.5 page) — Architecture diagram first (Yi Ding: "draw a picture first"). One-paragraph walkthrough of major components and data flow.
- Module-by-module design (~2–2.5 pages) — Each subsection: what the module does, the design choice made, alternatives considered, and why this choice wins.
- Design alternatives and trade-offs (~0.5–1 page) — For each major decision, explicitly discuss what was not chosen and why.
Source: Irene Zhang — "Every design choice made in X should be discussed with alternatives and the reasons for the choice"; Levin & Redell — "What were the alternatives considered at various points, and why were the choices made?"
S4 Implementation (0.5–1 page)
- Prototype description — Language, framework, LOC, integration with existing systems.
- Key engineering decisions — Non-obvious implementation choices worth documenting.
Source: Levin & Redell — "Does the paper describe something that has actually been implemented?"; Irene Zhang — "explain how you constructed a prototype to test your hypothesis."
S5 Evaluation (3–4 pages)
Paragraph structure:
- Experimental setup (~0.5 page) — Hardware, baselines, workloads, metrics. Enough detail to reproduce.
- End-to-end comparison (~1–1.5 pages) — X vs baselines for application Y on environment Z. Main performance results.
- Microbenchmarks / Ablation (~1–1.5 pages) — Isolate each design decision's contribution. Ablation experiments decompose the gains.
- Scalability (~0.5 page) — Show behavior as problem size, cluster size, or load increases.
Critical rule (Irene Zhang): State every experimental conclusion three times:
- Section opening: hypothesis ("We expect X to outperform Y because...")
- Section closing: conclusion ("Results show X outperforms Y by Z%")
- Figure caption: evidence ("Figure N shows X achieves Z% better throughput than Y")
Two experiment types:
- Type 1: X vs baselines for Y on Z (end-to-end comparison)
- Type 2: Ablation — remove each design component to measure its individual impact
S6 Related Work (1 page)
- Group by methodology or approach, not by individual papers.
- For each group: what they do, what limitation remains, how your work differs.
- Use a comparison table when comparing 4+ systems on specific dimensions.
Source: Levin & Redell — "Are comparisons with previous work clear and explicit?"; Irene Zhang — use comparison tables.
S7 Conclusion (0.5 page)
Three sentences (Irene Zhang formula):
- The hypothesis / problem addressed
- The solution approach
- The key result
Writing Patterns
Four reusable patterns for structuring systems papers. See references/writing-patterns.md for detailed examples.
Pattern 1: Gap Analysis (Lucid, ASPLOS'23)
Enumerate gaps G1–Gn in Introduction → map to answers A1–An in Design. Creates a clear contract with the reader.
Pattern 2: Observation-Driven (GFS, arXiv 2025)
Present production observations (O1–O3) in Motivation → derive design insights → build system around insights. Effective when you have real workload data.
Pattern 3: Contribution List (Blox, EuroSys'24; Sia, SOSP'23)
Numbered contributions in Introduction, each mapping to a section. Readers (and reviewers) can track claims through the paper.
Pattern 4: Thesis Formula (Irene Zhang)
Structure the entire paper around: "X is better for applications Y running in environment Z." Introduction states it, Design explains how, Evaluation proves it.
Conference Differences
Warning: Venue rules change yearly. Always verify against the current year's CFP before submission.
| Venue | Format | Submission Limit | Camera-Ready | References |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| OSDI | USENIX | 12 pages | 14 pages | Unlimited |
| NSDI | USENIX | 12 pages | 14 pages | Unlimited |
| SOSP | ACM SIGOPS | 12 pages (tech content) | — | Unlimited |
| ASPLOS | ACM SIGPLAN | 11 pages | 13 pages | Unlimited |
| EuroSys | ACM | 12 pages | — | Unlimited |
Based on 2025/2026 CFPs. Verify current limits before submission.
Writing Philosophy
Manage Reader State (Gernot Heiser)
Treat the reader's cognitive load like an OS managing process state. Never introduce a concept without context. Never reference something defined later without a forward pointer.
Six-Dimensional Quality (Levin & Redell)
Self-check against: Original Ideas, Reality (is it built?), Lessons (what did you learn?), Choices (alternatives discussed?), Context (related work fair?), Presentation (clear writing?).
Page-One Figure (hzwer)
Include a figure on the first page that captures the core idea. Reviewers form first impressions from the title, abstract, and page-one figure.
Academic Integrity Requirements
Citation Discipline
- Never generate citations from memory. Use ml-paper-writing's citation verification workflow (Semantic Scholar / DBLP / CrossRef APIs).
- Mark unverified references as
[CITATION NEEDED].
Prohibition of Fabrication
- Do NOT fabricate production observations, traces, deployment experiences, or experimental results.
- Do NOT generate fake venue rules, paper metadata, or best-paper claims.
- Do NOT copy paragraph-level text from reference papers. This blueprint provides structural guidance, not copy-paste templates.
LLM Disclosure
- Some venues require disclosure of substantial LLM use in writing or ideation. Check each venue's AI policy in the current CFP.
Attribution
- When structures are inspired by specific papers (e.g., Lucid's gap-analysis pattern), cite the inspiration.
- Cross-repository references (e.g., ARIS paper-slides structure) are attributed, not copied.
Temporal Validity
- Venue rules (page limits, format, AI policies) change annually. All venue information in this skill is based on 2025/2026 CFPs. Always verify against the current year's CFP.
Workflow: Structuring a New Systems Paper
Step 1: Read this SKILL.md for page allocation overview
Step 2: Read references/section-blueprints.md for per-section paragraph templates
Step 3: Choose a writing pattern from references/writing-patterns.md
Step 4: Draft section by section following the blueprint
Step 5: Run the checklist from references/checklist.md before submission
Step 6: Use ml-paper-writing for citation verification and LaTeX formatting
Quick Checklist
- Thesis statement follows "X is better for Y in Z" formula
- Introduction has numbered contributions (3–5)
- Each contribution maps to a paper section
- Design discusses alternatives for every major choice
- Every eval conclusion stated 3 times (hypothesis, result, caption)
- Related work grouped by methodology, not individual papers
- Page budget within venue limits
- All citations verified programmatically (no hallucinated references)
Common Issues and Solutions
| Issue | Solution |
|---|---|
| Paper feels like a "feature list" | Restructure around thesis formula: X better for Y in Z |
| Evaluation lacks depth | Add ablation experiments isolating each design decision |
| Reviewers say "incremental" | Strengthen gap analysis: make G1–Gn crisper with evidence |
| Design section too long | Move implementation details to S4, keep S3 at design level |
| Motivation feels weak | Add production observations with concrete numbers |
| Related work reads like a bibliography | Group by approach, add explicit differentiation |
References
Writing Guidance
- references/section-blueprints.md — Detailed per-section paragraph templates with authoritative source quotes and best-paper structural examples
- references/writing-patterns.md — Four writing patterns with concrete paper examples
Venue-Specific
- references/checklist.md — 7-stage pre-submission checklist covering structure, writing quality, evaluation rigor, design quality, academic integrity, venue-specific requirements (OSDI/NSDI/ASPLOS/SOSP/EuroSys), and final pass
- references/systems-conferences.md — Conference overview, deadlines, track descriptions, formatting requirements, submission rules, and format conversion guides
- references/reviewer-guidelines.md — How systems conference reviewers evaluate papers, with venue-specific criteria and common concerns
LaTeX Templates
- templates/osdi2026/ — OSDI 2026 (USENIX format)
- templates/nsdi2027/ — NSDI 2027 (USENIX format)
- templates/asplos2027/ — ASPLOS 2027 (ACM SIGPLAN format)
- templates/sosp2026/ — SOSP 2026 (ACM SIGPLAN format)
Frequently asked questions about Systems Paper Writing
Similar skills
Supabase Docs Authoring
Streamline your Supabase documentation process.
Docs Writer
Streamline your documentation process with precision.
Clinical Case Report
Generate structured medical case presentations.
CrossFrame Suite
Streamline complex workflows for Chinese structural analysis.
Em Dash Expert
Master the em dash for clear, precise writing.
Nature Statistics Reporting
Enhance manuscript statistics for high-impact journal submissions.
