Policies for Call for Papers and Reviewing - cgo-conference/public GitHub Wiki

Two Submissions

  • There are two submissions per year. One in May and one in September.
  • Papers submitted to the first round can either be accepted, rejected, or invited to submit a revised version of the paper to the second round.
  • Papers rejected in the first round may not be submitted to the second round.
  • For papers invited to submit a revised version, authors will be given a list of revisions that should be acted on to improve the paper.
  • We will make every effort to ensure that the revised paper is reviewed by the same reviewers (and possibly additional reviewers), who will assess whether the revisions are satisfactory. If so, the paper will be accepted. If the revised paper is rejected, the authors may submit a further revised version in a future year, which will be treated as a new submission.

Paper Types and Formatting

  • There are three paper types: research papers, tools papers, practical experience papers.
  • Papers of all type are written in the same format with the same page limits.
  • Depending on the year, the format is either IEEE or ACM (typically alternating).
    • Page limit is 10 pages for the submission and 11 pages for the camera ready version.
    • Appendices, the AE appendix, and references do not count to the page limit.
    • There are no fees for extra pages.
    • Submissions can contain supplementary materials in an appendix. Reviewers are not required to read the appendix.

Research papers

  • Research papers are reviewed on the "standard" criteria: accuracy, significance, originality, and clarity.

Tool papers

  • Tool papers must give a clear account of a new tool’s functionality.
    • They must describe the problem that the tool helps to solve, how the tool works, and provide an evaluation of the tool.
    • There does not have to be novel research in the way the tool works, but it does have to solve a novel problem or in a novel (and better) way compared to existing tools
  • Tools paper authors should prepend their paper title with ‘Tool:’ to provide clarity that this is a tools paper during the review process (this can be removed for the final camera-ready paper).
  • The successful evaluation of an artifact is mandatory for a Tool Paper.
    • Therefore, authors of work conditionally accepted as Tool Papers must submit an artifact to the Artifact Evaluation Committee.
    • The successful evaluation of the artifact is a requirement for final acceptance.
  • Availability of the tool is a fixed requirement (which we should highlight in the call for tool papers and not in the requirement for passing AE)
  • The selection criteria for papers in this category are:
    • Originality: Papers should present CGO-related technologies applied to real-world problems with scope or characteristics that set them apart from previous solutions.
    • Usability: The presented tool or compiler should have broad usage or applicability. They are expected to assist in CGO-related research, or could be extended to investigate or demonstrate new technologies. If significant components are not yet implemented, the paper will not be considered.
    • Documentation: The tool or compiler should be presented on a web-site giving documentation and further information about the tool.
    • Benchmark Repository: A suite of benchmarks for testing should be provided.
    • Availability: The tool or compiler should be available for public use.
    • Foundations: Papers should incorporate the principles underpinning Code Generation and Optimization (CGO). However, a thorough discussion of theoretical foundations is not required; a summary of such should suffice.
    • Artifact Evaluation: The submitted artifact must be functional and support the claims made in the paper.

Practical experience papers

  • Practical experience papers should summarize a practical experience with realistic case studies.

  • Practical experience paper authors should prepend their paper title with ‘Practical:’ to provide clarity that this is a practical experience paper during the review process (this can be removed for the final camera-ready paper).

  • Practical experience papers are encouraged, but not required, to submit an artifact to the Artifact Evaluation process.

  • The selection criteria for papers in this category are:

    • Originality: Papers should present CGO-related technologies applied to real-world problems with scope or characteristics that set them apart from previous solutions. Alternatively, papers may also report on scaling known techniques to significantly larger and/or more complex real-world problems.
    • Foundations: Papers should incorporate the principles underpinning Code Generation and Optimization (CGO). However, a thorough discussion of theoretical foundations is not required; a summary of such should suffice.
    • Insight: The practical experience should provide meaningful conclusions related to CGO topics that show unexpected or novel characteristics.
    • Applicability: The results of the practical experience should be applicable beyond the specific system evaluated in the paper.

Reviewing Policy

  • Reviewing of paper is performed using double blindness.
  • Double blindness also applied to tool papers (but if sticking to it is too difficult, we should be not too strict about policing it)