| Line 51: | Line 51: | ||
*Santiago Bock, University of Pittsburgh, USA | *Santiago Bock, University of Pittsburgh, USA | ||
*Lingda Li, Rutgers University, USA | *Lingda Li, Rutgers University, USA | ||
| − | *Lin Ma, | + | *Lin Ma, Huawei America Research Lab, USA |
| − | * | + | *Yiannis Nikolakopulos, Chalmers University, Sweden |
*Jeeva Paudel, University of Alberta, Canada | *Jeeva Paudel, University of Alberta, Canada | ||
*Paul Thomson, Imperial College London, UK | *Paul Thomson, Imperial College London, UK | ||
Revision as of 15:02, 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. 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. |
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. |
Sponsors and supporters
