Conference Information
PLDI 2016 : ACM SIGPLAN conference on Programming Language Design and Implementation
http://conf.researchr.org/home/pldi-2016
Submission Date:
2015-11-08
Notification Date:
2016-02-16
Conference Date:
2016-06-13
Location:
Santa Barbara, California, USA
Years:
37
CCF: a   CORE: a*   QUALIS: a1   Viewed: 6597   Tracked: 11   Attend: 1

Conference Location
Advertisment
Call For Papers
PLDI is a premier forum for all areas of programming language research, including the design, implementation, theory, and efficient use of languages. PLDI seeks outstanding research that has broad appeal and spans the breadth of programming languages.

Submissions

Please note that formatting requirements for PLDI’16 may be different from previous years. Details can be found in the Instructions for Authors. The submission site is https://pldi16.hotcrp.com.

To enable double-blind reviewing, author names and their affiliations must be omitted from submissions, and references to related work by the authors should be in the third person (e.g., not “We build on our previous work …” but rather “We build on the work of …”). However, nothing should be done in the name of anonymity that weakens the submission or makes the job of reviewing the paper more difficult (e.g., important background references should not be omitted or anonymized). If you have questions about the logistics for the double-blind reviewing process, please look at the double-blind reviewing FAQ.

Papers must describe unpublished work that is not currently submitted for publication elsewhere as described by SIGPLAN’s Republication Policy. Submitters should also be aware of ACM’s Policy and Procedures on Plagiarism.

Evaluation Criteria

The program committee and the external review committee will evaluate the technical contribution of each submission as well as its general accessibility to the PLDI audience. Papers will be judged on significance, originality, and clarity. The paper must be organized so that it is easily understood by an audience with varied expertise. The paper should clearly identify what has been accomplished, why it is significant, and how it relates to previous work.

Review Process

The PLDI review process will use two phases in order to balance the need for high quality reviews, the growing number of paper submissions, and the practical limits on program committee size. In the first phase, each paper will receive at least three reviews from which the PC and EPC will identify those papers most viable for publication in PLDI. Those papers progressing to the second phase will receive a further two reviews. Each phase will have an author response mechanism, on the principle that authors should have the opportunity to respond to each review. The majority of papers will be given the opportunity for author response at the end of the first phase. Some papers may be promoted directly to the second phase without author response (authors of such papers would be notified). Authors are not required nor able to revise their submission after the initial paper submission deadline.

Artifact Evaluation Process

Authors of accepted papers will be invited to formally submit these supporting materials to the Artifact Evaluation process. The Artifact Evaluation process, is run by a separate committee whose task is to assess how the artifacts support the work described in the papers. This submission is voluntary and will not influence the final decision regarding the papers. Papers that go through the Artifact Evaluation process successfully will receive a seal of approval printed on the papers themselves. Additional information will be available on the PLDI AEC web page closer to the submission deadline.

Publication

Authors of accepted papers will be required to sign an ACM copyright release.

AUTHORS TAKE NOTE: The official publication date is the date the proceedings are made available in the ACM Digital Library. This date may be up to two weeks prior to the first day of your conference. The official publication date affects the deadline for any patent filings related to published work. (For those rare conferences whose proceedings are published in the ACM Digital Library after the conference is over, the official publication date remains the first day of the conference.)
Last updated by Dou Sun in 2015-08-22
Related Publications
Acceptance Ratio
YearSubmittedAcceptedAccepted(%)
20091964120.9%
20081843418.5%
20071784525.3%
20061693621.3%
20051352820.7%
20031312821.4%
20021692816.6%
20011443020.8%
20001733017.3%
19991302620%
19981363122.8%
19971583119.6%
19961122825%
19951052826.7%
Advertisment
Related Conferences
Comments
comments powered by Disqus