| Line 44: | Line 44: | ||
'''Committee members:''' | '''Committee members:''' | ||
| − | * | + | *David Boehme, LLNL, USA |
| − | + | *Santiago Bock, University of Pittsburgh, USA | |
| − | + | *Lingda Li, Rutgers University, USA | |
| − | + | *Lin Ma, Washington University St. Louis, USA | |
| − | + | *Ioannis Nikolakopulos, Chalmers University, Sweden | |
| + | *Jeeva Paudel, University of Alberta, Canada | ||
| + | *Paul Thomson, Imperial College London, UK | ||
| + | *Peter Libic, Charles University in Prague, Czech Republic | ||
| + | *Dave Wilkinson, University of Pittsburgh, USA | ||
| + | *Weiwei Chen, Qualcomm, USA | ||
| + | *Riyadh Baghdadi, ENS and University Pierre et Marie Curie, Paris, France | ||
| + | *Na Meng, University of Texas Austin, USA | ||
| + | *Arun Raman, Qualcomm, USA | ||
| + | *Bapi Chatterjee, Chalmers University, Sweden | ||
| + | *Martin Maas, University of California Berkeley, USA | ||
| + | *Vojtech Horky, Charles University in Prague, Czech Republic | ||
| + | *Vasileios Trigonakis, EPFL, Switzerland | ||
| + | *Mahdi Eslamimehr, University of California Los Angeles, USA | ||
| + | *Yuhao Zhu, University of Texas Austin, USA | ||
| + | *Melanie Kambadur, Columbia University, USA | ||
| + | *Michael Laurenzano, UMich, USA | ||
| style="width: 20%" valign="top" | | | style="width: 20%" valign="top" | | ||
| Line 58: | Line 74: | ||
We consider AE as a continuous learning curve. If you have questions or comments and suggestions on how to improve packaging and reviewing process, please get in touch or use our public [https://groups.google.com/forum/#!forum/collective-mind Google] or [http://www.linkedin.com/groups/Reproducible-research-experimentation-in-computer-7433414 LinkedIn] groups. | We consider AE as a continuous learning curve. If you have questions or comments and suggestions on how to improve packaging and reviewing process, please get in touch or use our public [https://groups.google.com/forum/#!forum/collective-mind Google] or [http://www.linkedin.com/groups/Reproducible-research-experimentation-in-computer-7433414 LinkedIn] groups. | ||
| + | |||
| + | <span style="font-size:large">'''<span style="font-family: tahoma,geneva,sans-serif">Prior Artifact Evaluation</span>'''</span> | ||
| + | |||
| + | Artifacts have been already evaluated at several conferences and workshops including recent [http://pldi14-aec.cs.brown.edu PLDI 2014], [http://2014.splashcon.org/track/splash2014-artifacts OOPSLA 2014] and [http://adapt-workshop.org/2014 ADAPT 2014]. Our eventual goal is to develop the common evaluation methodology gradually and collaboratively. See [http://artifact-eval.org artifact-eval.org] and [http://c-mind.org/reproducibility c-mind.org/reproducibility] for more details. | ||
|} | |} | ||
Revision as of 08:45, 8 December 2014
 |
Artifact Evaluation for PPoPP'15 |
| Important dates
Packaging guidelines We use the following guidelines for artifacts. Because we want to encourage as many of you as possible to submit, these are only guidelines, not hard rules. Of course, if the material you want us to evaluate is fairly standard, following these suggestions will greatly simplify our lives. After all, remember: You want us to be able to evaluate your artifact, don't you? How to submit Please read the guidelines on what to submit. Please upload your submission to EasyChair (common with CGO). Review process The review process is described in detail here. |
Artifact Evaluation Committee (AEC) Chairs:
Advisory board:
Committee members:
|
Above threshold Here will be a list of papers with artifacts above threshold. cTuning foundation provided a cash prize of 500$ for a distinguished artifact from CGO or PPoPP. Discussions We consider AE as a continuous learning curve. If you have questions or comments and suggestions on how to improve packaging and reviewing process, please get in touch or use our public Google or LinkedIn groups. Prior Artifact Evaluation Artifacts have been already evaluated at several conferences and workshops including recent PLDI 2014, OOPSLA 2014 and ADAPT 2014. Our eventual goal is to develop the common evaluation methodology gradually and collaboratively. See artifact-eval.org and c-mind.org/reproducibility for more details. |
Sponsors and supporters
