Transcript Slide 1
Welcome to PLDI 2009 General chair: Michael Hind Program chair: Amer Diwan Tutorial chair: Kim Hazelwood Workshops chair: Ranjit Jhala FIT chair: Rodric Rabbah Student research chair: Marco Pistoia Local arrangements chair: David Gregg Attendance Trends (as of June 18, 2009) 350 344 330 300 250 244 220 2006 2007 2008 2009 200 150 100 68 75 50 57 65 47 74 49 51 53 35 40 25 40 60 67 31 0 PLDI LCTES ISMM PLAS Tutorials PLDI Attendance Breakdown Regular vs. Student 350 300 110 115 250 200 95 88 150 100 220 219 149 132 '08 '09 50 0 '06 '07 Student Reg Program Committee Analyzed recent trends to identify areas; picked top people in proportion to the areas Ali-Reza Adl-Tabatabai, Intel Chandra Krintz, UCSB Steve Blackburn, ANU Doug Lea, SUNY Oswego Hans Boehm, HP Ondrej Lhotak, Waterloo Karl Crary, CMU Tamiya Onodera, IBM Pedro Diniz, IST Jens Palsberg, UCLA Lieven Eeckhout, Ghent Bill Pugh, UMD David Grove, IBM Shaz Qadeer, Microsoft Matthias Hauswirth, Lugano Jeremy Siek, Colorado Laurie Hendren, McGill Yannis Smaragdakis, UMass Wilson Hsieh, Google Linda Torczon, Rice Jens Knoop, TU Vienna Xiangyu Zhang, Purdue New in PLDI 2009 • External Review Committee (ERC) – 51 members (printed proceedings are missing names) – Nominated by program committee as experts in their own areas – Bid on papers—just like the program committee • Inspired by ISMM 2008 Paper Submission • Double blind without compromising paper – Authors could submit TRs etc. which I forwarded to reviewers as needed – Authors could reveal their identity in their rebuttal if needed • Authors indicated conflicts with PC and ERC members Paper Reviewing • 196 paper submissions (a record!) • 3 PC and 1 ERC members reviewed each paper – X reviews: 310 – Y reviews: 371 – Z reviews: 110 • Obtained additional external reviews if a paper had too few X/Y reviews Rebuttal/Discussion Period • 10 days between rebuttal due date and PC meeting • I acted on three categories: 1. Not enough expert reviews Obtained additional reviews 2. Strongly conflicting reviews (AD) Initiated online discussion ~180 messages total 3. Strong review was external Initiated online discussion PC Meeting (1) • 2 full days in Boulder, CO • 100% attendance • Accepted 41 papers PC Meeting (2) • Used “Identify the Champion” • Discussed every paper with an “A” • PC members could resurrect any paper – And did! • Michael Hind and Todd Mytkowicz took detailed notes, managed time, … • Jens Palsberg subbed for me or Mike Acceptance Statistics 1995 Accepted 1996 Submitted 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 0 50 100 150 200 Acceptance by Area 27% Interactions 20% Program transformations Debugging Novel programming models 7% Pointer analyses Rejected 33% 14% Accepted 18% Performance analysis 10% Parallel languages 7% Explitcit parallelism 30% Safety/Security Language designs 13% 21% Type systems/logics 10% Domain-specific 3% Performance optimizations 14% Program analyses 35% Memory management 15% Extracting parallelism 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 Special Thanks • Lisa Tolles at Sheridan • Paolo and Rich, start submission software • Mike Hind and Todd Mytkowicz • PC and ERC members • Authors Announcements • Distinguished paper award after last session • Enjoy