Skill UI

This guide details the rigorous, multi-phase artifact evaluation process for research papers submitted to OOPSLA. It covers best practices for creating robust, reproducible, and reusable software artifacts, aiming to achieve Functional, Reusable, and Available badges. Learn how to structure your repository, map claims explicitly, and pass the 'kick-the-tires' dry run, treating every evaluator as a hostile fresh VM.

A comprehensive guide for authors transitioning an accepted OOPSLA conference paper into a journal article for PACMPL. It details crucial steps including formatting changes, de-anonymization, updating Data-Availability Statements, managing author identities (ORCID), handling ACM open-access rights, and preparing for the associated presentation talk (SPLASH).

This guide provides a framework for designing and auditing the experimental rigor of academic papers, particularly in systems and programming languages. It emphasizes the crucial link between a claim type (e.g., 'Faster') and the required evidence type (e.g., benchmarks, user studies, formal proofs). Learn how to establish robust baselines, define clear workload rules, size experiments for conference cycles, and ensure statistical compliance for maximum impact.

A comprehensive guide for authors preparing the 'Related Work' section for top-tier academic conferences focused on programming languages, such as OOPSLA. It details rigorous citation standards (PACMPL journal format), mandates comprehensive venue coverage (POPL, PLDI, ICFP, etc.), and emphasizes identifying precise technical differences ('deltas') between the proposed work and existing literature, moving beyond mere inventory listing.

This guide provides comprehensive best practices for achieving scientific reproducibility in systems and programming language papers, following stringent SIGPLAN guidelines. It details the necessary rigor for documenting hardware, managing complex runtime measurements (like JIT warmup and variance), and maintaining a detailed, machine-readable provenance ledger and data-availability statement.

A comprehensive guide detailing the multi-stage, double-anonymous review process used at major academic conferences like OOPSLA. It explains the four possible outcomes (Accept, Minor/Major Revision, Reject), the mechanics of 'round-hopping' between submission volumes, and provides strategic advice on how to write author responses and manage revision expectations to maximize publication chances.

A comprehensive guide detailing the strategic and technical requirements for submitting research papers to major conferences like OOPSLA. It covers critical steps such as selecting the correct submission round, adhering to strict formatting rules (e.g., page limits), proactively maintaining double-anonymity, properly filing Data-Availability Statements, and managing complex revision or concurrent submissions to maximize acceptance chances.

This comprehensive guide assists reviewers and authors in determining the most appropriate venue for programming language research within the SIGPLAN community. It provides a detailed 'center-of-mass' test, helping categorize contributions based on whether they emphasize metatheory (POPL), performance engineering (PLDI), functional techniques (ICFCP), or the broad design scope characteristic of OOPSLA. It guides the decision-making process for academic submissions.

This guide provides a detailed framework for researchers to determine the most suitable venue (e.g., PLDI, POPL, OOPSLA) for their programming language or systems research paper. It guides authors on whether their core evidence lies in theoretical proofs, working implementations with benchmarks, or empirical usage studies, ensuring optimal submission routing and maximizing acceptance chances.

This guide helps researchers determine the optimal venue (like POPL, PLDI, OOPSLA) for their academic papers on programming languages. It advises authors on whether their core contribution is theoretical (proofs, semantics), implementation-focused (compilers, benchmarks), or empirical (user studies), ensuring their work reaches the most appropriate specialized reviewer community.

A comprehensive guide for producing the mandatory supplementary video figure for UIST submissions. This material treats the 3-minute video as core evidence, detailing requirements for resolution (1080p/4K), codec (H.264), and anonymity. It guides authors on scripting the video around key claims, ensuring uncut interaction loops, and maintaining academic rigor to convince reviewers of the system's reality.

This guide outlines best practices for structuring supplementary materials for OOPSLA submissions. It emphasizes the 'layering decision,' ensuring the core body can stand alone while appendices provide necessary proofs and technical details. It covers maintaining double-anonymity across all included content and performing crucial cross-checks for consistency across multiple review rounds.