Should the extended abstract and paper be stand-alone?
- Both should be stand-alone in the sense that reviewers are not required to read the full papers in round one. The extended abstract can refer to figures or tables in the full paper, or anonymized links to content, with the understanding that reviewers are under no obligation to read them. The full paper should not refer to the extended abstract.
My paper is/will be posted on arXiv or my institution’s technical report site. What should I do?
- You can submit to ASPLOS a paper already posted to arXiv. You can also post your paper to arXiv after submitting it to ASPLOS. We recommend that you use a different title and system name for the different versions of your paper. We expect authors to refrain from advertising their work on social media during the review period (and two weeks before). While ASPLOS reviewers are expected to not actively search for the identity of your work online, social media posts may result in a notification that the reviewer cannot easily ignore, which would be disruptive to the review process.
I see that I can submit code; does it need to be anonymous?
- It does not have to be anonymous, but it will greatly lower the bar for letting PC members review it if it is. There is a GitHub anonymization service that people have used in the past for other conferences: https://github.com/tdurieux/anonymous_github
I am getting a warning from the HotCRP format checker for my submission: “Margins too small: text height exceeds 9in by 6% (page 1).” What do I do?
- This is because of the ASPLOS template which prints a line at the top of page 1, and can safely be ignored. You can also ignore errors on reference pages.