All CFPs on WikiCFP
Present CFP : 2016
The program committee will consider the following criteria when evaluating submitted papers:
Novelty: The paper presents new ideas and/or results and places these ideas and results appropriately within the context established by previous research in the field.
Importance: The paper contributes significantly to the advancement of knowledge in the field. In addition to more traditional contributions, OOPSLA welcomes papers that diverge from the dominant trajectory of the field.
Evidence: The paper presents sufficient evidence supporting its claims. Examples of evidence include proofs, implemented systems, experimental results, statistical analyses, case studies, and anecdotes.
Clarity: The paper presents its contributions, methodology and results clearly.
Since 2013, OOPSLA has been following a two-phase review process, with the goal of improving the quality of accepted papers. The first reviewing phase assesses the papers using the criteria stated above. At the PC meeting a set of papers will be conditionally accepted and all other papers will be rejected.
Authors of conditionally accepted papers will be provided with the usual committee reviews along with a set of mandatory revisions. After approximately two months, the authors will provide a second submission. The second and final reviewing phase assesses how well the mandatory revisions have been performed by the authors and thereby determines the final accept/reject status of the paper. The intent and expectation is that the mandatory revisions can be adequately addressed within two months and hence that conditionally accepted papers will be accepted in the second phase.
The second submission should clearly identify how the mandatory revisions were addressed. To that end, the second submission must be accompanied by a cover letter mapping each mandatory revision request to specific parts of the paper. The absence of this cover letter is grounds for the paper’s rejection.
Details on formatting and other submission requirements can be found in the Instructions for Authors.
OOPSLA 2016 submissions must conform to both the ACM Policy on Prior Publication and Simultaneous Submissions and the SIGPLAN Re-publication Policy. In addition, OOPSLA 2016 is implementing a (lightweight) double-blind submission process (i.e., authors are anonymous at submission time, though their identity is known during committee deliberations).
Authors of papers that are conditionally accepted in the first phase will be invited to formally submit supporting materials to the Artifact Evaluation process. 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.
Authors of accepted papers are encouraged to make these materials publicly available upon publication of the proceedings, by including them as “source materials” in the ACM Digital Library.
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 the conference. The official publication date affects the deadline for any patent filings related to published work.
For additional information, clarification, or answers to questions please contact the OOPSLA Chair (Yannis Smaragdakis) at firstname.lastname@example.org.