Authors who have already submitted a paper to PLDI'08 are encouraged to submit the abstract to ISMM as well. However, if the paper is accepted at PLDI, then the abstract should be withdrawn and no full paper submitted.
Submissions will be read by the program committee and designated reviewers and judged on scientific merit, innovation, readability and relevance. Papers previously published or already being reviewed by another conference are not eligible (except see below); if a closely related paper has been submitted to a journal, the authors must notify the program chair (see the SIGPLAN republication policy). Authors can submit an abstract for a paper that is under consideration for another venue. However, they can only submit a full paper if the paper is not already being considered or published elsewhere. (The intent of this policy is to allow authors to submit an abstract for a paper that has also been submitted to PLDI. If the paper is accepted at PLDI, then no paper should be submitted to ISMM and the abstract withdrawn.)
Submissions should be no more than 10 pages (including bibliography, excluding well marked appendices) in standard ACM SIGPLAN conference format: two columns, nine-point font on a ten-point baseline, with pages 20pc (3.33in) wide and 54pc (9in) tall, with a column gutter of 2pc (0.33in). Detailed formatting guidelines are available at the URL below. along with formatting templates or style files for LaTeX. Papers that violate these guidelines will be rejected by the program chair. Program committee members are not required to read appendices, and so a paper should be intelligible without them. All accepted papers will appear in the published proceedings.
Double-blind reviewing The ISMM paper reviewing process uses double-blind reviewing and provides an opportunity for rebuttal. In double-blind reviewing the authors are anonymous to the reviewers, just as reviewers are anonymous to the authors. Authors are required to make reasonable efforts not to disclose their identities to reviewers. For example, you should not give your names nor mention your institution, research group or project name, etc. Where necessary for flow you could say "the XYZ project" and add in a footnote that the name is withheld. Discuss your own prior work in third person, as you would other related work. Avoid making paper drafts too public, to reduce the possibility of inadvertently revealing your identities to reviewers. Authors will be able to provide reviewers with anonymous auxiliary material such as proofs and source code via the PC Chair (see below). Reviewers, for their part, will be honour bound not to try to discover authors' identities, which will be known only by the programme chair until a suitable point in the programme committee's deliberations. We are using this process because research indicates that author anonymity reduces bias in reviewing.
Auxiliary Material When submitting papers to ISMM 08, authors will be able to provide the PC Chair with a URL for upload of auxiliary material. The URL will not be seen by reviewers. he authors may reference such material in their paper, noting that the material has been made available to the PC Chair. This facility may be used by authors to provide reviewers with useful information beyond the scope of the submitted paper, such as technical reports, proofs and source code without disclosing the authors' identity. Authors are obliged to make reasonable efforts to make all auxiliary material suitably anonymous. Authors are reminded that reviewers are under no obligation to read any auxiliary material.
Review committee ISMM 08 introduces a Review Committee (RC) to the reviewing process. The RC will complement the Program Committee (PC) by providing expert reviews. The same reviewing standards will apply to the RC as the PC. However, RC members will only review around four papers each, and will not participate in the PC meeting. The purpose of the RC is to increase the breadth and depth of the reviewer pool, thus increasing the likelihood of conflict-free expert reviews. This approach should be more practical with double-blind reviewing than ad hoc expert review assignments (as used by a number of conferences). The formal selection process, transparency of its constituency, and that each reviewer will review multiple papers should increase the quality and accountability of reviews as compared to traditional ad hoc expert review assignments.
RebuttalThe rebuttal process will occur in early March 2008, and will give the authors opportunity to respond succinctly to factual errors in reviews, before the program committee meets to make its decisions. The committee may, but need not, respond to rebuttals or revise reviews at or after the committee meeting to reflect better the committee's rationale.
Submitted papers must be in English and formatted to print on US Letter (8.5 x 11 inches) paper. Submissions must contain an abstract and postal and electronic mailing addresses for at least one contact author. All papers must be submitted on-line, preferably in Portable Document Format (PDF), although the submission system will also accept PostScript.
- Steve Blackburn, ISMM 08 Programme Chair