Skip to main content
NEW · APP STORE Now on iOS · macOS · iPad Android & Windows soon GET IT
Prompts Systems Paper Paragraph-Level Blueprint

writer writing skill risk: low

Systems Paper Paragraph-Level Blueprint

The prompt provides a paragraph-level structural blueprint for 10-12 page systems papers targeting OSDI, SOSP, ASPLOS, NSDI, and EuroSys, including page allocations, section bluepr…

SKILL 1 file

SKILL.md
---
name: auto-claude-code-research-in-sleep-writing-systems-papers
description: "Paragraph-level structural blueprint for 10-12 page systems papers targeting OSDI, SOSP, ASPLOS, NSDI, and EuroSys. Provides page allocation, paragraph templates, and writing patterns. Use when user says /\"写系统论文/\", /\"systems paper structure/\", /\"OSDI paper/\", /\"SOSP paper/\", or wants fine-grained st"
---
# Writing Systems Papers: Paragraph-Level Blueprint

Structural guidance for **$ARGUMENTS**

## Relationship to Other ARIS Skills

- **paper-write**: General paper generation workflow with citation verification. This skill complements it with systems-specific structural blueprints.
- **paper-slides**: Conference presentation generation (Beamer+PPTX). Already covers talks — no overlap.
- **paper-plan**: Research outline creation. Use paper-plan first, then this skill for paragraph-level structure.

**Boundary**: paper-write handles the generation workflow (LaTeX output, DBLP verification, section-by-section drafting). This skill provides the **structural skeleton** — page budgets, paragraph roles, and writing patterns specific to systems venues.

---

## Page Allocation: 12-Page Systems Paper

| Section | Pages | Key Content |
|---------|-------|-------------|
| Abstract | ~0.25 | 150–250 words, 5 sentences |
| S1 Introduction | 1.5–2 | Problem → Gap → Insight → Contributions |
| S2 Background & Motivation | 1–1.5 | Terms + Production observations |
| S3 Design | 3–4 | Architecture + Modules + Alternatives |
| S4 Implementation | 0.5–1 | Prototype, LOC, engineering |
| S5 Evaluation | 3–4 | Setup + E2E + Ablation + Scalability |
| S6 Related Work | 1 | By methodology, explicit comparison |
| S7 Conclusion | 0.5 | 3-sentence summary |

---

## Section Blueprints

### Abstract (5 sentences)

```text
S1: Problem context and importance
S2: Gap in existing approaches
S3: Thesis — "X is better for Y in environment Z" (Irene Zhang formula)
S4: Approach summary + headline results
S5: Impact or availability
```

Sources: Levin & Redell — "Can you state the new idea concisely?"; Irene Zhang — "abstract cannot use terms introduced in the paper."

### S1 Introduction (1.5–2 pages)

1. **Problem** (~0.5p) — Domain + concrete numbers + why it matters
2. **Gap analysis** (~0.5p) — G1–Gn: specific shortcomings with evidence
3. **Key insight** (1 para) — Thesis: "X is better for Y in Z"
4. **Contributions** (~0.5p) — 3–5 numbered, testable claims with §N references

Pattern: hzwer Move 1 (territory) → Move 2 (niche) → Move 3 (occupy).

### S2 Background & Motivation (1–1.5 pages)

1. **Technical background** (~0.5p) — Define-before-use (Gernot Heiser)
2. **Observations** (~0.5–1p) — O1, O2, O3 from production data → design insights

### S3 Design (3–4 pages)

1. **Architecture overview** (~0.5p) — Diagram first (Yi Ding: "draw a picture first")
2. **Module details** (~2–2.5p) — Per module: choice, alternatives, why
3. **Trade-offs** (~0.5–1p) — Summary of design decisions

Rule: "Every design choice must discuss alternatives" (Irene Zhang).

### S4 Implementation (0.5–1 page)

Language, LOC, framework, key engineering decisions. Keep concise.

### S5 Evaluation (3–4 pages)

1. **Setup** (~0.5p) — Hardware, baselines, workloads, metrics
2. **End-to-end** (~1–1.5p) — X vs baselines for Y on Z
3. **Ablation** (~1–1.5p) — Remove each component, measure impact
4. **Scalability** (~0.5p) — Behavior at increasing scale

**Three-statement rule** (Irene Zhang): Every conclusion stated as:
- Hypothesis (section opening)
- Conclusion (section closing)
- Caption (figure caption)

### S6 Related Work (1 page)

Group by methodology. For each group: what they do, limitation, how we differ.

### S7 Conclusion (0.5 page)

Three sentences: problem, solution, result. No new information.

---

## Writing Patterns

### Pattern 1: Gap Analysis
Enumerate G1–Gn in intro → A1–An in design → verify in evaluation.
*Example*: Lucid (ASPLOS'23) — 5 gaps mapped to 5 answers.

### Pattern 2: Observation-Driven
O1–O3 from production data → insights → design components.
*Example*: GFS (arXiv 2025) — 3 observations drive 3 components.

### Pattern 3: Contribution List
Numbered contributions in intro, each with §N cross-reference.
*Example*: Blox (EuroSys'24) — 7 contributions; Sia (SOSP'23) — 5 contributions.

### Pattern 4: Thesis Formula
"X is better for Y in Z" structures the entire paper.
Combine with other patterns for maximum impact.

---

## Conference Differences

> Always verify against current CFP — rules change yearly.

| Venue | Format | Pages | Camera-Ready |
|-------|--------|-------|-------------|
| OSDI | USENIX | 12 | 14 |
| NSDI | USENIX | 12 | 14 |
| SOSP | ACM SIGOPS | 12 | — |
| ASPLOS | ACM SIGPLAN | 11 | 13 |
| EuroSys | ACM | 12 | — |

Based on 2025/2026 CFPs.

---

## Workflow

```text
1. Determine venue and page limit
2. Choose writing pattern (Gap/Observation/Contribution/Thesis)
3. Allocate pages per section using the table above
4. Draft Abstract following 5-sentence template
5. Draft Introduction: Problem → Gap → Insight → Contributions
6. Draft Motivation with production observations (if available)
7. Draw architecture figure, then write Design
8. Draft Implementation (concise)
9. Draft Evaluation: setup → E2E → ablation → scalability
10. Draft Related Work by methodology groups
11. Draft Conclusion: 3 sentences
12. Run pre-submission checklist
13. Hand off to /paper-write for LaTeX generation and citation verification
```

---

## Quick Self-Check

- [ ] Thesis follows "X is better for Y in Z"
- [ ] 3–5 numbered contributions with §N references
- [ ] Design discusses alternatives for every major choice
- [ ] Eval conclusions stated 3 times (hypothesis, result, caption)
- [ ] Related work grouped by methodology
- [ ] Page budget within venue limits
- [ ] No fabricated observations, traces, or results
- [ ] All citations verified (delegate to /paper-write)

---

## Academic Integrity

- Never fabricate observations, traces, or experimental results
- Never generate citations from memory — use /paper-write citation workflow
- Disclose LLM use per venue policy
- This blueprint provides structural guidance, not copy-paste text

---

## Authoritative Sources

1. Levin & Redell — "How (and How Not) to Write a Good Systems Paper" (USENIX)
2. Irene Zhang — "Hints on how to write an SOSP paper"
3. Gernot Heiser — Style Guide + Paper Writing Talk
4. Timothy Roscoe — "Writing reviews for systems conferences"
5. Yi Ding — "How to write good systems papers?"
6. hzwer & DingXiaoH — WritingAIPaper (GitHub)

INPUTS

$ARGUMENTS REQUIRED

topic or paper focus passed by user

e.g. OSDI paper on new OS scheduler

REQUIRED CONTEXT

  • systems paper topic or $ARGUMENTS

OPTIONAL CONTEXT

  • target venue
  • page limit

ROLES & RULES

  1. Every design choice must discuss alternatives
  2. Always verify against current CFP — rules change yearly
  3. Never fabricate observations, traces, or experimental results
  4. Never generate citations from memory — use /paper-write citation workflow
  5. Disclose LLM use per venue policy
  6. This blueprint provides structural guidance, not copy-paste text

EXPECTED OUTPUT

Format
markdown
Schema
markdown_sections · Abstract (5 sentences), S1 Introduction, S2 Background & Motivation, S3 Design, S4 Implementation, S5 Evaluation, S6 Related Work, S7 Conclusion, Writing Patterns, Conference Differences, Workflow, Quick Self-Check, Academic Integrity
Constraints
  • follow page budgets and section blueprints
  • use specified writing patterns
  • include thesis formula and contribution cross-references

SUCCESS CRITERIA

  • Thesis follows "X is better for Y in Z"
  • 3–5 numbered contributions with §N references
  • Design discusses alternatives for every major choice
  • Eval conclusions stated 3 times (hypothesis, result, caption)
  • Related work grouped by methodology
  • Page budget within venue limits
  • No fabricated observations, traces, or results
  • All citations verified

FAILURE MODES

  • May generate copy-paste text instead of structural guidance
  • May skip venue CFP verification

EXAMPLES

Includes 4 paper examples (Lucid ASPLOS'23, GFS arXiv 2025, Blox EuroSys'24, Sia SOSP'23) plus 4 named writing patterns with references.

CAVEATS

Dependencies
  • $ARGUMENTS
  • paper-write skill
  • paper-plan skill
  • Current venue CFP
Missing context
  • Value for $ARGUMENTS placeholder

QUALITY

OVERALL
0.88
CLARITY
0.90
SPECIFICITY
0.95
REUSABILITY
0.85
COMPLETENESS
0.90

IMPROVEMENT SUGGESTIONS

  • Add a short worked example showing how $ARGUMENTS would be instantiated for one concrete paper topic

USAGE

Copy the prompt above and paste it into your AI of choice — Claude, ChatGPT, Gemini, or anywhere else you're working. Replace any placeholder sections with your own context, then ask for the output.

MORE FOR WRITER