PACMPL (OOPSLA) seeks contributions on all aspects of programming languages and software engineering. Authors of papers published in PACMPL will present their work at OOPSLA in Boston.

Papers may target any stage of software development, including requirements, modeling, prototyping, design, implementation, generation, analysis, verification, testing, evaluation, maintenance, and reuse of software systems. Contributions may include the development of new tools (such as language front-ends, program analyses, and runtime systems), new techniques (such as methodologies, design processes, and code organization approaches), new principles (such as formalisms, proofs, models, and paradigms), and new evaluations (such as experiments, corpora analyses, user studies, and surveys).

Proceedings are available online.

SPLASH Keynotes and OOPSLA talks were livestreamed. Both remote and in-person participants asked questions using sli.do for live streamed SPLASH Keynotes and OOPSLA talks.

The recordings are available on youtube: keynotes and talks.

Papers

Title
A Derivation Framework for Dependent Security Label Inference
OOPSLA
An Empirical Study of the Effect of Source-level Loop Transformations on Compiler Stability
OOPSLA
Media Attached
AnyDSL: A Partial Evaluation Framework for Programming High-Performance Libraries
OOPSLA
Automatic Diagnosis and Correction of Logical Errors for Functional Programming Assignments
OOPSLA
Bidirectional Evaluation with Direct Manipulation
OOPSLA
BioScript: Programming Safe Chemistry on Laboratories-on-a-ChipDistinguished Paper Award
OOPSLA
Collapsible Contracts: Fixing a Pathology of Gradual Typing
OOPSLA
Compositional Programming and Testing of Dynamic Distributed Systems
OOPSLA
Concurrency-aware Object-oriented Programming with Roles
OOPSLA
Link to publication DOI
Conflict Resolution for Structured Merge via Version Space Algebra
OOPSLA
Cross-Component Garbage Collection
OOPSLA
DOI Media Attached
DeepBugs: A Learning Approach to Name-based Bug Detection
OOPSLA
Distributed System Development with ScalaLoci
OOPSLA
Effect Handlers for the Masses
OOPSLA
Empowering Union and Intersection Types with Integrated Subtyping
OOPSLA
Link to publication DOI Pre-print
Every Data Structure Deserves Lock-Free Memory Reclamation
OOPSLA
ExceLint: Automatically Finding Spreadsheet Formula Errors
OOPSLA
Faster Variational Execution with Transparent Bytecode Transformation
OOPSLA
Finding Broken Promises in Asynchronous JavaScript Programs
OOPSLA
Finding Code That Explodes Under Symbolic Evaluation
OOPSLA
FlashProfile: A Framework for Synthesizing Data Profiles
OOPSLA
Format Abstraction for Sparse Tensor Algebra Compilers
OOPSLA
Gradual Liquid Type InferenceDistinguished Paper Award
OOPSLA
GraphIt - A High-Performance Graph DSL
OOPSLA
Horn-ICE Learning for Synthesizing Invariants and Contracts
OOPSLA
Identifying Refactoring Opportunities for Replacing Type Code with Subclass and State
OOPSLA
Incrementalizing Lattice-Based Program Analyses in Datalog
OOPSLA
Julia Subtyping: a Rational Reconstruction
OOPSLA
DOI Media Attached
Julia: Dynamism and Performance Reconciled by Design
OOPSLA
Leto: Verifying Application-Specific Fault Tolerance through Parameterized Execution Models
OOPSLA
MadMax: Surviving Out-of-Gas Conditions in Ethereum Smart ContractsDistinguished Paper Award
OOPSLA
Link to publication Pre-print File Attached
Object-Oriented Recovery for Non-Volatile Memory
OOPSLA
One Tool, Many Languages: Language-Parametric Transformation with Incremental Parametric Syntax
OOPSLA
Optimal Stateless Model Checking under the Release-Acquire Semantics
OOPSLA
Parallelization of Dynamic Languages: Synchronizing Built-in Collections
OOPSLA
Pre-print
Persistence Semantics for Weak Memory
OOPSLA
Precise and Scalable Points-to Analysis via Data-Driven Context Tunneling
OOPSLA
Precision-Guided Context Sensitivity for Pointer Analysis
OOPSLA
RacerD: Compositional Static Race Detection
OOPSLA
Pre-print
Randomized Testing of Distributed Systems with Probabilistic GuaranteesDistinguished Paper Award
OOPSLA
Reactive Caching for Composed Services
OOPSLA
Reconciling High-level Optimizations and Low-level Code in LLVM
OOPSLA
Refinement in object-sensitivity points-to analysis via slicing
OOPSLA
Relational Program Synthesis
OOPSLA
Robust Relational Layout Synthesis from Examples for Android
OOPSLA
Safe Replication through Bounded Concurrency Verification
OOPSLA
Scopes as Types
OOPSLA
Link to publication DOI File Attached
Secure Serverless Computing Using Dynamic Information Flow Control
OOPSLA
ShareJIT: JIT Code Cache Sharing across Processes and its Practical Implementation
OOPSLA
Software Multiplexing: Share Your Libraries and Statically Link Them Too
OOPSLA
Link to publication DOI Pre-print
Sound Deadlock Prediction
OOPSLA
Speeding up Symbolic Reasoning for Relational Queries
OOPSLA
Test Generation for Higher-Order Functions in Dynamic Languages
OOPSLA
The Root Cause of Blame: Contracts for Intersection and Union Types
OOPSLA
Thread-Safe Reactive Programming
OOPSLA
DOI Pre-print File Attached
Towards Understanding the Costs of Avoiding Out-of-Thin-Air Results
OOPSLA
Verified Three-Way Program Merge
OOPSLA
Virtual Machine Design for Parallel Dynamic Programming Languages
OOPSLA
What Happens-After the First Race? Enhancing the Predictive Power of Happens-Before Based Dynamic Race Detection
OOPSLA
DOI Authorizer link Pre-print
goSLP: Globally Optimized Superword Level Parallelism Framework
OOPSLA

Call for Papers

Papers appear in an issue of the Proceedings of the ACM on Programming Languages (PACMPL). PACMPL is a Gold Open Access journal, all papers will be freely available to the public. Authors can voluntarily cover the article processing charge (400$), but payment is not required.

Paper Selection Criteria

We consider the following criteria when evaluating papers:

Novelty: The paper presents new ideas and results and places them appropriately within the context established by previous research.

Importance: The paper contributes to the advancement of knowledge in the field. We also welcomes papers that diverge from the dominant trajectory of the field.

Evidence: The paper presents sufficient evidence supporting its claims, such as proofs, implemented systems, experimental results, statistical analyses, case studies, and anecdotes.

Clarity: The paper presents its contributions, methodology and results clearly.

Review Process

A two-stage process with lightweight double-blind reviewing is used to select papers. This FAQ address common concerns.

The first reviewing stage assess papers using the above criteria. At the end of that stage a set of papers is conditionally accepted.

Authors of conditionally accepted papers must make a set of mandatory revisions. The second reviewing phase assesses whether the revisions have been addressed. The expectation is that the revisions can be addressed and that conditionally accepted papers will be accepted in the second phase.

The second submission must be accompanied by a cover letter mapping each mandatory revision request to specific parts of the paper.

Submission Requirements

For double-blind reviewing papers must adhere to two rules:

  1. author names and institutions must be omitted, and
  2. references to authors’ own related work should be in the third person (e.g., not “We build on our previous work …” but rather “We build on the work of …”).

The purpose of this process is to help reviewers come to an initial judgement about the paper without bias, not to make it impossible for them to discover the authors if they were to try. Nothing should be done in the name of anonymity that weakens the submission or makes the job of reviewing the paper more difficult.

Submissions must conform to both the ACM Policies for Authorship and SIGPLAN’s Republication Policy. Authors will be required to sign a license or copyright release.

The official publication date is the date the proceedings are made available in the ACM Digital Library, which may be up to two weeks prior to the first day of the conference.

Artifact Evaluation

Authors of conditionally accepted papers are encouraged to submit supporting materials for Artifact Evaluation.
Authors should indicate with their initial submission if an artifact exists and describe its nature and limitations.

Further information is  here.

Questions

For additional information or answers to questions please write to oopsla@splashcon.org.

Dates
You're viewing the program in a time zone which is different from your device's time zone - change time zone

Wed 7 Nov
Times are displayed in time zone: Guadalajara, Mexico City, Monterrey change

10:30 - 12:00: Types and EffectsOOPSLA at Studio 1
Chair(s): Colin GordonDrexel University
10:30 - 10:52
Talk
Effect Handlers for the Masses
OOPSLA
Jonathan Immanuel BrachthäuserUniversity of Tübingen, Germany, Philipp SchusterUniversity of Tübingen, Germany, Klaus OstermannUniversity of Tübingen, Germany
10:52 - 11:15
Talk
Empowering Union and Intersection Types with Integrated Subtyping
OOPSLA
Fabian MuehlboeckCornell University, Ross TateCornell University
Link to publication DOI Pre-print
11:15 - 11:37
Talk
Julia Subtyping: a Rational Reconstruction
OOPSLA
Francesco Zappa NardelliInria, Julia BelyakovaNortheastern University, USA, Artem PelenitsynNortheastern University, Benjamin ChungNortheastern University, Jeff BezansonJulia Computing, Jan VitekNortheastern University
DOI Media Attached
11:37 - 12:00
Talk
Scopes as Types
OOPSLA
Hendrik van AntwerpenTU Delft, Casper Bach PoulsenDelft University of Technology, Arjen RouvoetDelft University of Technology, Eelco VisserDelft University of Technology
Link to publication DOI File Attached
10:30 - 12:00: Parallelism and PerformanceOOPSLA at Studio 2
Chair(s): Arjun GuhaUniversity of Massachusetts Amherst
10:30 - 10:52
Talk
Every Data Structure Deserves Lock-Free Memory Reclamation
OOPSLA
Nachshon CohenEPFL, Switzerland
10:52 - 11:15
Talk
Parallelization of Dynamic Languages: Synchronizing Built-in Collections
OOPSLA
Benoit DalozeJKU Linz, Austria, Arie TalTechnion, Stefan MarrUniversity of Kent, Hanspeter MössenböckJKU Linz, Austria, Erez PetrankTechnion
Pre-print
11:15 - 11:37
Talk
Virtual Machine Design for Parallel Dynamic Programming Languages
OOPSLA
Remigius MeierETH Zurich, Switzerland, Armin RigoPyPy.org, Switzerland, Thomas GrossETH Zurich
11:37 - 12:00
Talk
goSLP: Globally Optimized Superword Level Parallelism Framework
OOPSLA
13:30 - 15:00: SecurityOOPSLA at Studio 1
Chair(s): Tobias WrigstadUppsala University
13:30 - 13:52
Talk
A Derivation Framework for Dependent Security Label Inference
OOPSLA
Peixuan LiPenn State University, Danfeng ZhangPennsylvania State University
13:52 - 14:15
Talk
MadMax: Surviving Out-of-Gas Conditions in Ethereum Smart ContractsDistinguished Paper Award
OOPSLA
Neville GrechUniversity of Athens, Michael KongUniversity of Sydney, Anton JurisevicUniversity of Sydney, Lexi BrentUniversity of Sydney, Bernhard ScholzThe University of Sydney, Yannis SmaragdakisUniversity of Athens
Link to publication Pre-print File Attached
14:15 - 14:37
Talk
Faster Variational Execution with Transparent Bytecode Transformation
OOPSLA
Chu-Pan WongCarnegie Mellon University, Jens MeinickeMagdeburg University, Lukas Lazarek, Christian KaestnerCarnegie Mellon University
14:37 - 15:00
Talk
Secure Serverless Computing Using Dynamic Information Flow Control
OOPSLA
Kalev AlpernasTel Aviv University, Cormac FlanaganUniversity of California, Santa Cruz, Sadjad FouladiStanford University, Leonid RyzhykVMware Research, Mooly SagivTel Aviv University, Thomas Schmitz, Keith WinsteinStanford University
13:30 - 15:00: Language Design 1OOPSLA at Studio 2
Chair(s): Eelco VisserDelft University of Technology
13:30 - 13:52
Talk
AnyDSL: A Partial Evaluation Framework for Programming High-Performance Libraries
OOPSLA
Roland LeißaSaarland University, Germany, Klaas BoescheSaarland University, Sebastian HackSaarland University, Germany, Arsène Pérard-GayotSaarland University, Germany, Richard MembarthDFKI, Germany, Philipp SlusallekDFKI, Germany, André MüllerJohannes Gutenberg University, Bertil SchmidtJohannes Gutenberg University
13:52 - 14:15
Talk
Julia: Dynamism and Performance Reconciled by Design
OOPSLA
Jeff BezansonJulia Computing, Benjamin ChungNortheastern University, Jiahao ChenCapital One, Stefan Karpinski, Viral B ShahJulia Computing, Jan VitekNortheastern University, Lionel ZoubritzkyÉcole Normale Supérieure
14:15 - 14:37
Talk
GraphIt - A High-Performance Graph DSL
OOPSLA
14:37 - 15:00
Talk
One Tool, Many Languages: Language-Parametric Transformation with Incremental Parametric Syntax
OOPSLA
15:30 - 17:00: Language Design 2OOPSLA at Studio 1
Chair(s): Jonathan AldrichCarnegie Mellon University
15:30 - 15:52
Talk
Bidirectional Evaluation with Direct Manipulation
OOPSLA
Mikaël MayerEPFL, Switzerland, Viktor KunčakEPFL, Switzerland, Ravi ChughUniversity of Chicago
15:52 - 16:15
Talk
BioScript: Programming Safe Chemistry on Laboratories-on-a-ChipDistinguished Paper Award
OOPSLA
Jason OttUniversity of California, Riverside, Tyson LovelessUniversity of California, Riverside, Chris CurtisUniversity of California, Riverside, Mohsen LesaniUniversity of California, Riverside, Philip BriskUniversity of California, Riverside
16:15 - 16:37
Talk
Distributed System Development with ScalaLoci
OOPSLA
Pascal WeisenburgerTechnische Universität Darmstadt, Mirko Köhler, Guido SalvaneschiTU Darmstadt
16:37 - 17:00
Talk
Concurrency-aware Object-oriented Programming with Roles
OOPSLA
Michael FaesETH Zurich, Thomas GrossETH Zurich
Link to publication DOI
15:30 - 17:00: Compiler OptimizationOOPSLA at Studio 2
Chair(s): Patrick LamUniversity of Waterloo
15:30 - 15:52
Talk
Format Abstraction for Sparse Tensor Algebra Compilers
OOPSLA
15:52 - 16:15
Talk
ShareJIT: JIT Code Cache Sharing across Processes and its Practical Implementation
OOPSLA
Xiaoran XuRice University, Keith CooperRice University, Jacob BrockUniversity of Rochester, Yan Zhang, Handong YeFuturewei Technologies
16:15 - 16:37
Talk
Reconciling High-level Optimizations and Low-level Code in LLVM
OOPSLA
Juneyoung LeeSeoul National University, Chung-Kil HurSeoul National University, Ralf JungMPI-SWS, Zhengyang LiuUniversity of Utah, John RegehrUniversity of Utah, Nuno P. LopesMicrosoft Research
16:37 - 17:00
Talk
An Empirical Study of the Effect of Source-level Loop Transformations on Compiler Stability
OOPSLA
Zhangxiaowen GongUniversity of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Zhi ChenUniversity of California, Irvine, Justin SzadayUniversity of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, David WongIntel, Zehra SuraIBM Research, Neftali Watkinson, Saeed MalekiMicrosoft Research, David PaduaUniversity of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Alexander VeidenbaumUniversity of California, Irvine, Alexandru NicolauUniversity of California, Irvine, Josep TorrellasUniversity of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
Media Attached
17:05 - 18:00: Awards / SIGPLAN Town Hall MeetingOOPSLA at Studio 1
Chair(s): Manu SridharanUber, Jens PalsbergUniversity of California, Los Angeles

Thu 8 Nov
Times are displayed in time zone: Guadalajara, Mexico City, Monterrey change

10:30 - 12:00: Weak Memory and RefactoringOOPSLA at Studio 1
Chair(s): Richard JonesUniversity of Kent
10:30 - 10:52
Talk
Optimal Stateless Model Checking under the Release-Acquire Semantics
OOPSLA
Parosh Aziz AbdullaUppsala University, Sweden, Mohamed Faouzi AtigUppsala University, Bengt JonssonUppsala University, Tuan Phong NgoUppsala University
10:52 - 11:15
Talk
Towards Understanding the Costs of Avoiding Out-of-Thin-Air Results
OOPSLA
Peizhao OuUniversity of California, Irvine, Brian DemskyUniversity of California, Irvine
11:15 - 11:37
Talk
Persistence Semantics for Weak Memory
OOPSLA
Azalea RaadMPI-SWS, Germany, Viktor VafeiadisMPI-SWS, Germany
11:37 - 12:00
Talk
Identifying Refactoring Opportunities for Replacing Type Code with Subclass and State
OOPSLA
10:30 - 12:00: Types and ContractsOOPSLA at Studio 2
Chair(s): Hakjoo OhKorea University
10:30 - 10:52
Talk
Horn-ICE Learning for Synthesizing Invariants and Contracts
OOPSLA
Deepak D'Souza, Ezudheen P, Pranav GargUniversity of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Daniel NeiderMax Planck Institute for Software Systems, P. MadhusudanUniversity of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
10:52 - 11:15
Talk
Gradual Liquid Type InferenceDistinguished Paper Award
OOPSLA
Niki VazouIMDEA Software Institute, Éric TanterUniversity of Chile & Inria Paris, David Van HornUniversity of Maryland, USA
11:15 - 11:37
Talk
Collapsible Contracts: Fixing a Pathology of Gradual Typing
OOPSLA
Daniel FelteyNorthwestern University, USA, Ben GreenmanNortheastern University, USA, Christophe ScholliersUniversiteit Gent, Belgium, Robby FindlerNorthwestern University, USA, Vincent St-AmourNorthwestern University
11:37 - 12:00
Talk
The Root Cause of Blame: Contracts for Intersection and Union Types
OOPSLA
Jack WilliamsUniversity of Edinburgh, UK, J. Garrett MorrisUniversity of Kansas, USA, Philip WadlerUniversity of Edinburgh, UK
13:30 - 15:00: Parallelism and CorrectnessOOPSLA at Studio 1
Chair(s): Werner DietlUniversity of Waterloo, Canada
13:30 - 13:52
Talk
Thread-Safe Reactive Programming
OOPSLA
Joscha DrechslerTechnische Universität Darmstadt, Ragnar MogkTechnische Universität Darmstadt, Guido SalvaneschiTU Darmstadt, Mira MeziniTU Darmstadt
DOI Pre-print File Attached
13:52 - 14:15
Talk
RacerD: Compositional Static Race Detection
OOPSLA
Sam BlackshearFacebook, Nikos Gorogiannis, Peter W. O'HearnFacebook and University College London, Ilya SergeyYale-NUS College
Pre-print
14:15 - 14:37
Talk
What Happens-After the First Race? Enhancing the Predictive Power of Happens-Before Based Dynamic Race Detection
OOPSLA
Umang MathurUniversity of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Dileep KiniUniversity of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Mahesh ViswanathanUniversity of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
DOI Authorizer link Pre-print
14:37 - 15:00
Talk
Sound Deadlock Prediction
OOPSLA
Christian Gram KalhaugeUniversity of California, Los Angeles, Jens PalsbergUniversity of California, Los Angeles
13:30 - 15:00: Static AnalysisOOPSLA at Studio 2
Chair(s): Karim AliUniversity of Alberta
13:30 - 13:52
Talk
Incrementalizing Lattice-Based Program Analyses in Datalog
OOPSLA
Tamás Szabóitemis / TU Delft, Gábor BergmannBudapest University of Technology and Economics / MTA-BME Lendület Research Group on Cyber-Physical Systems, Hungary, Sebastian ErdwegTU Delft, Markus Völterindependent / itemis, Germany
13:52 - 14:15
Talk
Precise and Scalable Points-to Analysis via Data-Driven Context Tunneling
OOPSLA
Minseok JeonKorea University, South Korea, Sehun JeongKorea University, Hakjoo OhKorea University
14:15 - 14:37
Talk
Precision-Guided Context Sensitivity for Pointer Analysis
OOPSLA
Yue LiAarhus University, Denmark, Tian TanAarhus University, Denmark, Anders MøllerAarhus University, Yannis SmaragdakisUniversity of Athens
14:37 - 15:00
Talk
Refinement in object-sensitivity points-to analysis via slicing
OOPSLA
Girish Maskeri RamaInfosys Limited, Raghavan KomondoorIndian Institute of Science, Bangalore, Himanshu SharmaIndian Institute of Science, Bangalore
15:30 - 17:00: PerformanceOOPSLA at Studio 1
Chair(s): Adam WelcUber Technologies
15:30 - 15:52
Talk
Cross-Component Garbage Collection
OOPSLA
DOI Media Attached
15:52 - 16:15
Talk
Reactive Caching for Composed Services
OOPSLA
Sebastian BurckhardtMicrosoft Research, Tim CoppietersVrije Universiteit Brussel, Belgium
16:15 - 16:37
Talk
Object-Oriented Recovery for Non-Volatile Memory
OOPSLA
Nachshon CohenEPFL, Switzerland, David T. AksunEPFL, James LarusEPFL
16:37 - 17:00
Talk
Software Multiplexing: Share Your Libraries and Statically Link Them Too
OOPSLA
Will DietzUniversity of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Vikram S. AdveUniversity of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
Link to publication DOI Pre-print
15:30 - 17:00: PotpourriOOPSLA at Studio 2
Chair(s): Anders MøllerAarhus University
15:30 - 15:52
Talk
DeepBugs: A Learning Approach to Name-based Bug Detection
OOPSLA
Michael PradelTU Darmstadt, Koushik SenUniversity of California, Berkeley
15:52 - 16:15
Talk
ExceLint: Automatically Finding Spreadsheet Formula Errors
OOPSLA
Dan Barowy, Emery D. BergerUniversity of Massachusetts, Amherst, Benjamin ZornMicrosoft Research
16:15 - 16:37
Talk
Finding Code That Explodes Under Symbolic Evaluation
OOPSLA
James BornholtUniversity of Washington, Emina TorlakUniversity of Washington
16:37 - 17:00
Talk
FlashProfile: A Framework for Synthesizing Data Profiles
OOPSLA
Saswat PadhiUniversity of California, Los Angeles, Prateek JainMicrosoft Research Lab, India, Daniel PerelmanUniversity of Washington, USA, Alex PolozovMicrosoft Research, Sumit GulwaniMicrosoft Research, Todd MillsteinUniversity of California, Los Angeles

Fri 9 Nov
Times are displayed in time zone: Guadalajara, Mexico City, Monterrey change

10:30 - 12:00: TestingOOPSLA at Studio 1
Chair(s): Kim BrucePomona College
10:30 - 10:52
Talk
Compositional Programming and Testing of Dynamic Distributed Systems
OOPSLA
Ankush DesaiUniversity of California, Berkeley, Amar PhanishayeeMicrosoft Research, Shaz QadeerMicrosoft Research, Sanjit SeshiaUC Berkeley
10:52 - 11:15
Talk
Randomized Testing of Distributed Systems with Probabilistic GuaranteesDistinguished Paper Award
OOPSLA
Burcu Kulahcioglu OzkanMPI-SWS, Germany, Rupak MajumdarMPI-SWS, Germany, Filip NiksicMPI-SWS, Mitra Tabaei BefroueiVienna University of Technology, Georg WeissenbacherTechnische Universität Wien
11:15 - 11:37
Talk
Test Generation for Higher-Order Functions in Dynamic Languages
OOPSLA
Marija SelakovicTU Darmstadt, Germany, Michael PradelTU Darmstadt, Rezwana Karim NawrinSamsung Research America, Frank TipNortheastern University
11:37 - 12:00
Talk
Finding Broken Promises in Asynchronous JavaScript Programs
OOPSLA
Saba AlimadadiNortheastern University, Di ZhongNortheastern University, USA, Magnus MadsenAarhus University, Frank TipNortheastern University
10:30 - 12:00: Program SynthesisOOPSLA at Studio 2
Chair(s): Jens PalsbergUniversity of California, Los Angeles
10:30 - 10:52
Talk
Relational Program Synthesis
OOPSLA
Yuepeng WangUniversity of Texas at Austin, Xinyu WangUT Austin, Isil DilligUT Austin
10:52 - 11:15
Talk
Robust Relational Layout Synthesis from Examples for Android
OOPSLA
Pavol BielikETH Zürich, Marc FischerETH Zurich, Martin VechevETH Zürich
11:15 - 11:37
Talk
Speeding up Symbolic Reasoning for Relational Queries
OOPSLA
Chenglong WangUniversity of Washington, USA, Alvin CheungUniversity of Washington, Rastislav BodikUniversity of Washington
11:37 - 12:00
Talk
Automatic Diagnosis and Correction of Logical Errors for Functional Programming Assignments
OOPSLA
Junho LeeKorea University, Dowon SongKorea University, Sunbeom SoKorea University, Hakjoo OhKorea University
13:30 - 14:15: VerificationOOPSLA at Studio 1
Chair(s): Tony HoskingAustralian National University / Data61
13:30 - 13:52
Talk
Leto: Verifying Application-Specific Fault Tolerance through Parameterized Execution Models
OOPSLA
Brett BostonMassachusetts Institute of Technology, Zoe GongMassachusetts Institute of Technology, Michael CarbinMassachusetts Institute of Technology
13:52 - 14:15
Talk
Safe Replication through Bounded Concurrency Verification
OOPSLA
Gowtham KakiPurdue University, Kapil EarankyPurdue University, KC SivaramakrishnanUniversity of Cambridge, Suresh JagannathanPurdue University
13:30 - 14:15: Safe MergingOOPSLA at Studio 2
Chair(s): David J. PearceVictoria University of Wellington
13:30 - 13:52
Talk
Verified Three-Way Program Merge
OOPSLA
Marcelo SousaUniversity of Oxford, Isil DilligUT Austin, Shuvendu LahiriMicrosoft Research
13:52 - 14:15
Talk
Conflict Resolution for Structured Merge via Version Space Algebra
OOPSLA
Fengmin Zhu, Fei HeTsinghua University

It is my great pleasure to present the program of the 2018 ACM SIGPLAN Conference on Object-Oriented Programming, Systems, Languages, and Applications. OOPSLA has broadened significantly beyond its original focus on object-oriented programming, and this year’s program contains papers on a diverse set of topics, addressing challenges across the software development lifecycle in both traditional and emerging domains.

This is the second year that OOPSLA papers are being published as an issue of the Proceedings of the ACM on Programming Languages (PACMPL). As OOPSLA review committee chair, I was responsible for forming and leading the review committee, which provides feedback on paper submissions and decides which papers would appear in this year’s PACMPL OOPSLA issue.

In forming the review committee, my aim was to ensure sufficient expertise across OOPSLA’s wide topic range while also achieving diversity across seniority, demographics, geography, and institution type (industry vs. academia). I formed candidate lists leveraging Frank Tip’s PC-miner tool and helpful feedback from the OOPSLA steering committee. The review committee did an outstanding job of providing detailed, constructive feedback on submissions and selecting an excellent set of papers for publication; I was truly amazed by their hard work and dedication.

During the review process, most papers received three reviews, with additional reviews assigned when expertise or confidence was lacking. After extensive online discussion, papers with a champion reviewer were chosen to be discussed at an in-person review committee meeting, which was co-located with PLDI 2018. During the meeting, we tried to lean positive in discussions: if a paper had an enthusiastic champion, and there were no serious concerns raised by other reviewers, we typically accepted the paper. OOPSLA’s two-phase review process aided this approach, as we could accept papers with minor flaws that could be addressed by the second-phase deadline (roughly 6 weeks after phase one notification). On papers where I was conflicted, David Grove administered the decision process and led the discussion. In the end, we accepted 60 of 216 submissions, an acceptance rate of 27.8%.

An external review committee was primarily tasked with reviewing all submissions co-authored by a member of the main review committee or the general chair. As required by SIGPLAN, review committee submissions were held to a higher standard to avoid any appearance of favoritism. Of 25 such submissions, 10 were accepted. The external review committee did a great job of providing detailed review feedback and participating actively in online discussion.

Other aspects of the OOPSLA review and publication process remain unchanged from previous years. As a PACMPL issue, all OOPSLA papers are available as open access from the ACM digital library, with SIGPLAN paying open access fees when authors cannot. OOPSLA has continued its two-phase reviewing process from previous years (a requirement for PACMPL issues), and we continued to run a separate artifact evaluation process to help certify supplementary artifacts for accepted papers.

It was my great honor and privilege to serve as review committee chair for OOPSLA. My thanks goes to the paper authors for submitting such exciting work to OOPSLA, and again to the review committees for their careful and detailed reviewing work. Thanks to previous chairs Yannis Smaragdakis and Jonathan Aldrich for help and advice throughout the process. And finally, thanks to Jan Vitek, who put a truly astounding amount of work into making SPLASH 2018 a success as general chair.

Welcome, and enjoy OOPSLA 2018!

Manu Sridharan
Uber
OOPSLA 2018 Review Committee Chair
Principal Editor of PACMPL Volume 2, Issue OOPSLA

Submission Preparation Instructions

PACMPL (OOPSLA) employs a two-stage, lightweight double-blind reviewing process, so papers must be anonymized.

Formatting: Submissions must be in PDF, printable in black and white on US Letter sized paper. All submissions must adhere to the “ACM Small” template available (in both LaTeX and Word formats) from http://www.acm.org/publications/authors/submissions. For LaTeX users, please use  acmart-pacmpl-template.tex, a lighter-weight package including only essential files, with the  acmsmall,  anonymous and review options. LaTeX-specific questions are fielded by the ACM.

Submitted papers may be at most 23 pages in 10 point font, excluding bibliographic references and appendices.

There is no page limit for bibliographic references and appendices. However, reviewers are not obligated to read the appendices.

Submissions do not meet the above requirements will be rejected without review.

Citations: Papers are expected to use author-year citations. Author-year citations may be used as either a noun phrase, such as “The lambda calculus was originally conceived by Church (1932)”, or a parenthetic phase, such as “The lambda calculus (Church 1932) was intended as a foundation for mathematics”. (Either parentheses or square brackets can be used to enclose the citations.) A useful test for correct usage it to make sure that the text still reads correctly when the parenthesized portions of any references are omitted. Take care with prepositions; in the first example above, “by” is more appropriate than “in” because it allows the text to be read correctly as a reference to the author. Sometimes, readability may be improved by putting parenthetic citations at the end of a clause or a sentence, such as “A foundation for mathematics was provided by the lambda calculus (Church 1932)”. In LaTeX, use  \citet{Church-1932} for citations as a noun phrase, “Church (1932)”, and  \citep{Church-1932} for citations as a parenthetic phrase, “(Church 1932)”; for details, see Sections 2.3–2.5 of the natbib documentation (natbib).

Author Response Period: from June 8-10, 2018 authors will be able to read reviews and respond to them.

Supplementary Materials: authors may attach non-anonymous supplementary material to a submission, on the understanding that reviewers may choose not to look at it. The material should be uploaded at submission time, as a single pdf or a tarball, not via a URL. This supplementary material need not be anonymized; it will only be revealed to reviewers after they have submitted their review.

Authorship Policies: All submissions are expected to comply with the  ACM Policies for Authorship.

Republication Policies: Papers must describe unpublished work that is not currently submitted for publication elsewhere as described by SIGPLAN’s Republication Policy. Submitters should also be aware of ACM’s Policy and Procedures on Plagiarism.

Information for Authors of Accepted Papers

  • The page limit for final versions of papers is 27 pages (excluding references) to ensure that authors have space to respond to reviewer comments and mandatory revisions.
  • PACMPL is a Gold Open Access journal. Authors may voluntarily cover the article processing charges (currently 400 USD).
  • We welcome all authors to attend OOPSLA and present accepted papers, regardless of nationality. If any author has visa-related difficulties, we will make arrangements to enable remote participation.
  • The official publication date is the date the papers are made available in the ACM Digital Library. This date may be up to two weeks prior to the first day of the conference. The official publication date affects the deadline for any patent filings related to published work.

The following content is based on Mike Hicks’s guidelines with input from Frank Tip, Keshav Pingali, Richard Jones, John Boyland, Yannis Smaragdakis and Jonathan Aldrich.

General

Q: Why double-blind reviewing?

A: Our goal is to give each a reviewer an unbiased “first look” at each paper. Studies have shown that a reviewer’s attitude toward a submission may be affected, even unconsciously, by the identity of the author. We want reviewers to be able to approach each submission without such involuntary reactions as “Barnaby; he writes a good paper” or “Who are these people? I have never heard of them.” For this reason, we ask that authors to omit their names from their submissions, and that they avoid revealing their identity through citation. A key principle to keep in mind is that we intend this process to be cooperative, not adversarial. If a reviewer does discover an author’s identity though a subtle clue or oversight the author will not be penalized.

Q: Do you think blinding works?

A: Studies of blinding with the flavor we are using show that author identities remain unknown 53% to 79% of the time. Moreover, about 5-10% of the time, a reviewer is certain of the authors, but then turns out to be at least partially mistaken. Yannis Smaragdakis’s survey of the OOPSLA 2016 PC showed that any given reviewer or a paper guessed at least one author correctly only 26-34% of the time, depending on whether you count a non-response to the survey as failure to guess or failure to answer. So, while sometimes authorship can be guessed correctly, the question is, is imperfect blinding better than no blinding at all? Our conjecture is that on balance the answer is “yes”.

Q: Can blind submission cause a paper to be rejected based on prior work by the same authors?

A: Author names are revealed to reviewers after they have submitted their review and before final decisions are made. Therefore, a reviewer can correct their review if they indeed have penalized the authors inappropriately. Unblinding prior to the PC meeting also avoids cases in which reviewers end up advancing the cause of a paper with which they have a conflict.

For Authors

Q: What do I have to do?

A: Your job is not to make your identity undiscoverable but simply to make it possible for our reviewers to evaluate your submission without having to know who you are. The main guidelines are simple: omit authors’ names from your title page, and when you cite your own work, refer to it in the third person. For example, if your name is Smith and you have worked on amphibious type systems, instead of saying “We extend our earlier work on statically typed toads (Smith 2004),” you might say “We extend Smith’s (2004) earlier work on statically typed toads.” Also, be sure not to include any acknowledgements that would give away your identity.

Q: How do I provide supplementary material?

A: On the submission site there will be an option to submit supplementary material along with your paper. This supplementary material need not be anonymized. Reviewers are under no obligation to look at this material. The submission itself is the object of review and so it should strive to convince the reader of at least the plausibility of reported results. Of course, reviewers are free to change their review upon viewing supplemental material. For those authors who wish to supplement, we encourage them to mention the supplement in the body of the paper and to make clear whether the supplementary material is anonymized or not. E.g., “The proof of Lemma 1 is included in the non-anonymous supplemental material submitted with this paper.”

Q: I am building on my work on the XYZ system. Do I rename it for anonymity?

A: No, you must not change the name and you should certainly cite your published past work on it! The relationship between systems and authors changes over time, so there will be at least some doubt about authorship.

Q: Can I submit a paper that extends a workshop paper?

A: Generally yes, but the ideal course of action depends on the degree of similarity and on publication status. On one extreme, if your workshop paper is a publication (i.e., the workshop has published a proceedings, with your paper in it) and your current submission improves on that work, then you should cite the workshop paper as if it were written by someone else. On the other extreme, if your submission is effectively a longer, more complete version of an unpublished workshop paper (e.g., no formal proceedings), then you should include a (preferably anonymous) version of the workshop paper as supplementary material. In general, there is rarely a good reason to anonymize a citation. When in doubt, contact the PC Chair.

Q: Am I allowed to post my paper on my web page, advertise it on mailing lists, send it to colleagues or give talks?

A: Double-blind reviewing should not hinder the usual communication of results. That said, we do ask that you not attempt to deliberately subvert the double-blind reviewing process by announcing the names of the authors of your paper to the potential reviewers of your paper. It is difficult to define exactly what counts as “subversion” here, but a blatant example would include sending individual e-mail to members of the PC about your work. On the other hand, it is fine to visit other institutions and give talks about your work, to present your submitted work during job interviews, to present your work at professional meetings, or to post your work on your web page. PC members will not be asked to recuse themselves from reviewing your paper unless they feel you have gone out of your way to advertise your authorship information to them. If you’re not sure about what constitutes “going out of your way”, please consult directly with the Program Chair.

We recognize that some researchers practice an open research style in which work is shared on mailing lists, arxiv, or social media as it is produced. We think this style of research can coexist with double-blind reviewing if authors follow simple guidelines. You may post to mailing lists, arxiv, social media, or another publicity channel about your work, but do not mention where the paper is submitted and do not use the exact, as-submitted title in the posting.

Q: Does double-blind have an impact on handling conflicts-of interest?

A: No. As an author, you should list PC members (and any others, since others may be asked for outside reviewers) who you believe have a conflict with you.

For Reviewers

Q: What should I do if I if I learn the authors’ identity?

A: If at any point you feel that the authors’ actions are largely aimed at ensuring that potential reviewers know their identity, you should contact the Program Chair. Otherwise you should not treat double-blind reviewing differently from regular blind reviewing. In particular, you should refrain from seeking out information on the authors’ identity, but if you discover it accidentally this will not automatically disqualify you as a reviewer. Use your best judgment.

Q: The authors provided a URL to supplemental material, I worry they will snoop my IP address. What should I do?

A: Contact the Program Chair, who will download the material on your behalf and make it available to you.

Q: Can I seek an outside review?

A: No. PC members should do their own reviews. If doing so is problematic, e.g., you don’t feel qualified, then consider the following options. First, submit a review that is as careful as possible, outlining areas where you think your knowledge is lacking. Assuming we have sufficient expert reviews, that could be the end of it: non-expert reviews are valuable too. Second, the review form provides a mechanism for suggesting additional expert reviewers to the PC Chair, who may contact them if additional expertise is needed.

We are grateful to the following researchers who provided additional external reviews for OOPSLA submissions.

  • Aws Albarghouthi
  • Robert Atkey
  • Raj Barik
  • Sam Blackshear
  • Björn B. Brandenburg
  • Sebastian Burckhardt
  • Michael Carbin
  • Aleksandar Chakarov
  • Stephen Chang
  • Keith Chapman
  • Jácome Cunha
  • Hoang-Hai Dang
  • Isil Dillig
  • Matthias Felleisen
  • Vijay Ganesh
  • Robert Grimm
  • Matthew Hammer
  • Chris Hawblitzel
  • Matthew Hicks
  • Chung-Kil Hur
  • Jean-Baptiste Jeannin
  • Michael Peyton Jones
  • Ralf Jung
  • Jan-Oliver Kaiser
  • Ohad Kammar
  • Nguyen Kim
  • Siddharth Krishna
  • Gary T. Leavens
  • Felix Xiaozhu Lin
  • Sam Lindley
  • Cristina Lopes
  • Giuliano Losa
  • Magnus Madsen
  • Mark Marron
  • Paul McKenney
  • Kayvan Memarian
  • Ali Mesbah
  • Martin Monperrus
  • Andrew Myers
  • Boyana Norris
  • Michael Norrish
  • David Padua
  • Michał Pałka
  • Tommaso Petrucciani
  • Ruzica Piskac
  • Azalea Raad
  • Reuben Rowe
  • Cole Schlesinger
  • Rishabh Singh
  • Youngju Song
  • Michael Spear
  • Olivier Tardieu
  • Ross Tate
  • James Wilcox
  • Nobuko Yoshida