技能 硬件工程 并行计算论文投稿指南

并行计算论文投稿指南

v20260724
ppopp-topic-selection
本指南帮助研究人员确定其并行和并发计算工作最合适的学术投稿平台。它通过核心问题“是并行性是重点,还是只是背景设定?”来界定PPoPP等顶级会议的适用范围。使用此框架区分专注于并行算法、编译器优化、并发理论还是硬件微架构的贡献,确保论文能够投到最匹配的会议。
获取技能
385 次下载
概览

PPoPP Topic Selection

Decide the venue before drafting. PPoPP — the ACM SIGPLAN Symposium on Principles and Practice of Parallel Programming — is the premier forum for work whose center of gravity is parallelism and concurrency: parallel languages, compilers, and runtimes; lock-free/wait-free data structures; GPU/accelerator and NUMA performance; parallel algorithms; and scalability studies. A technically strong paper whose real contribution is a compiler pass, a program logic, or a cache design is respected here and then rejected as out of scope. The question PPoPP reviewers ask first is: is the parallelism the point, or is it the setting?

The routing question that matters most

PPoPP sits inside the co-located HPCA/CGO/PPoPP/CC week, so its nearest neighbors are one hallway away and the boundary is real. Use the "is the parallelism the point?" test: if you removed the concurrency/parallel-performance story, is there still a paper? If yes, the contribution lives elsewhere.

Sibling-venue routing table

Signal in your project Better home Why
The contribution is a parallel algorithm, runtime, synchronization mechanism, or a concurrency-correctness + scalability result PPoPP This is PPoPP's center; both correctness and speedup are judged
The contribution is a compiler optimization or code-generation technique CGO (or PLDI) Backend/optimization is CGO's named center; PLDI for broader PL implementation
The contribution is a new program logic, type system, or semantics for concurrency POPL Foundational concurrency theory over a measured parallel system
The contribution is hardware/microarchitecture (coherence, memory system, accelerator design) ASPLOS / HPCA The result is about the machine, not the parallel program
The core is a large-scale HPC application or systems-at-scale deployment SC / ICS / IPDPS Application/HPC-systems framing over a general parallel-programming lesson
The core is a theoretical parallel-algorithm bound with no implementation SPAA Theory of parallelism; PPoPP wants practice alongside principle
A concurrency feature of a managed language / object system OOPSLA / PLDI Language-design framing dominates

Contribution shapes PPoPP rewards

  • Concurrent data structures — a new lock-free/wait-free structure or synchronization primitive with a correctness argument (linearizability, progress) and throughput/scalability under contention.
  • Parallel runtimes and schedulers — work-stealing, task graphs, futures, load balancing, with measured overhead and scaling on real workloads.
  • GPU / accelerator programming — techniques, languages, or libraries that raise occupancy, reduce divergence, or exploit heterogeneity, with speedups over strong GPU baselines.
  • Parallel algorithms in practice — graph, numerical, or sparse kernels whose parallel design and NUMA/locality engineering deliver a measured win.
  • Memory-model and concurrency-correctness work — race/linearizability checking, weak-memory reasoning, or verified concurrency, positioned as a parallel-programming enabler.
  • Compilers/languages for parallelism — DSLs, parallel IRs, and runtime-coupled compilation where the parallel-execution lesson (not a generic pass) is the contribution.

The remove-the-parallelism and swap-the-machine tests

Two quick tests sharpen a borderline verdict:

  • Remove-the-parallelism test: delete the concurrency and the scaling story. If a contribution remains (a better pass, a cleaner semantics, a faster core), route to CGO/PLDI/POPL/ASPLOS.
  • Swap-the-machine test: if your result is a single-configuration speedup that would vanish or reverse on another core count, socket topology, or GPU generation, it is a microbenchmark, not a parallel-programming contribution — PPoPP wants a lesson that survives the sweep.

Evidence maturity, without the cliché

Fit is necessary but not sufficient. A synchronization idea shown only at one thread count is a workshop poster; a runtime evaluated only on microbenchmarks needs real workloads before the research track; a scalability claim with no baseline is not yet a paper. PPoPP's twin bar — correct under concurrency and measurably scalable — is what promotes an idea from "interesting" to "PPoPP-shaped."

Cheap reconnaissance before committing

[Scope]   scan the last two PPoPP programs (dblp, conf.researchr.org) for your subarea
          -> 3+ recent papers = a reviewer pool exists; 0 = mismatch or a CGO/ASPLOS home
[Citations] is your bibliography majority PPoPP/PLDI/ASPLOS/SC/SPAA parallel venues?
          -> majority elsewhere => reviewers read you as a visitor; reframe the intro
[Calendar] PPoPP's summer deadline vs CGO/PLDI/ASPLOS/SC dates (same co-located family)
          -> route to the nearest honest fit; a marginal preference rarely justifies a year

Decision procedure

[Point test] remove the parallelism -> is there still a contribution? yes => reroute
[Claim type] concurrent structure / runtime / GPU / parallel algorithm / memory-model / parallel-language
[PPoPP vs CGO/PLDI] is a compiler pass the real result? -> CGO/PLDI
[PPoPP vs POPL] is it concurrency theory with no measured system? -> POPL
[PPoPP vs ASPLOS/HPCA] is it about the machine? -> ASPLOS/HPCA
[Verdict] PPoPP research track / sibling venue, with a one-line reason

Run this before the writing skills; a wrong venue decision wastes every later step. When the verdict is PPoPP, continue with ppopp-workflow for the calendar and ppopp-writing-style for the paper shape.

信息
Category 硬件工程
Name ppopp-topic-selection
版本 v20260724
大小 5.99KB
更新时间 2026-07-29
语言