PLDI 2006 Core Dump

1
PLDI 2006Core Dump

• Thomas Ball
• PLDI Program Chair

2
Overview

• Papers
• 174 submitted
• 169 reviewed
• 36 accepted
• Tutorials
• 4 tutorials
• Posters
• 15 posters
• Attendance
• Latest count 304

• Workshops
• Transactional Memory Workloads
• PL and Analysis for Security
• Lang. Comp. Hdw. for Transaction Computing
• Collocated conferences
• ISMM
• LCTES
• VEE

3
Program Committee
Thomas Ball, Microsoft Research (chair) Laurie Hendren, McGill University
Satish Chandra, IBM T.J. Watson Research Center Fritz Henglein, University of Copenhagen
Keith Cooper, Rice University Richard Johnson, NVIDIA
Patrick Cousot, École Normale Supérieure Andreas Krall, Vienna University of Technology
Jack Davidson, University of Virginia Peter Lee, CMU
Saumya K. Debray, University of Arizona Todd Millstein, UCLA
Michael Ernst, MIT Eliot Moss, University of Massachusetts
Mary Fernandez, ATT Labs Mooly Sagiv, Tel-Aviv University
Matthew Flatt, University of Utah Scott Stoller, SUNY - Stony Brook
Susan Graham, UC Berkeley Yuanyuan Zhou, University of Illinois - Urbana Champaign
4
Distribution of PC Phd Ages
5
Paper Reviewing

• 20 member PC
• 26 papers/PC member
• 4th expert (outside) review on most papers
• Physical meeting after POPL in Charleston, SC
• No blind review, no author feedback
• EasyChair system for reviewing

6
Review Process

• Set 36 papers as a ceiling, not a goal
• First discussed top 60 papers in sort order
• PC members proposed other papers
• Discussed 90-100 papers
• Each paper assigned a champion

7
Distribution of Paper Input
8
Distribution of Paper Input
9
Distribution of Paper Input
10
Does Order Received Matter?
11
Does Order Received Matter?
12
Does Order Received Matter?
13
History
14
(No Transcript)
15
(No Transcript)
16
(No Transcript)
17
Accepting More Quality Papers

• Critical mass, maturity, diversity
• Depth and breadth
• Its about community
• exclusive
• lower acceptance rate (15-20)
• minor deviations lead to rejecting quality papers
• focus on rejection rather than acceptance
• inclusive
• higher acceptance rate (20-25)
• minor deviations have less effect
• focus on acceptance rather than rejection