[Haskell-cafe] Second call for the *regular* round of Papers for the Haskell Symposium 2021
Hage, J. (Jurriaan)
J.Hage at uu.nl
Wed May 12 07:24:19 UTC 2021
First, some * BREAKING NEWS *: Jean-Philippe Bernardy has accepted the invitation to
speak at the symposium. He will be talking about Linear Haskell.
This is the second call for the *regular* round of papers for the upcoming Haskell Symposium.
Please forward to anyone that you believe might be interested.
The deadline for this round is May 21.
Apologies for receiving multiple copies of this announcement.
ACM SIGPLAN CALL FOR SUBMISSIONS
Haskell Symposium 2021
** virtual **
Thu 26 -- Fri 27 August, 2021
The ACM SIGPLAN Haskell Symposium 2021 will be co-located with the 2021
International Conference on Functional Programming (ICFP). Due to COVID-19
it will take place **virtually** this year.
Like last year, we will be using a lightweight double-blind reviewing process.
See further information below. Different from last year is that
we offer a new submission category: the tutorial. Details can be found below.
The Haskell Symposium presents original research on Haskell,
discusses practical experience and future development of the language, and
promotes other forms of declarative programming.
Topics of interest include:
* Language design, with a focus on possible extensions and modifications of
Haskell as well as critical discussions of the status quo;
* Theory, such as formal semantics of the present language or future
extensions, type systems, effects, metatheory, and foundations for
program analysis and transformation;
* Implementations, including program analysis and transformation,
static and dynamic compilation for sequential, parallel, and distributed
architectures, memory management, as well as foreign function and
* Libraries, that demonstrate new ideas or techniques for functional
programming in Haskell;
* Tools, such as profilers, tracers, debuggers, preprocessors,
and testing tools;
* Applications, to scientific and symbolic computing, databases, multimedia,
telecommunication, the web, and so forth;
* Functional Pearls, being elegant and instructive programming examples;
* Experience Reports, to document general practice and experience in
education, industry, or other contexts;
* Tutorials, to document how to use a particular language feature,
programming technique, tool or library within the Haskell ecosystem;
* System Demonstrations, based on running software rather than novel
Regular papers should explain their research contributions in both general and
technical terms, identifying what has been accomplished, explaining why it is
significant, and relating it to previous work, and to other languages where
Experience reports and functional pearls need not necessarily report original
academic research results. For example, they may instead report reusable
programming idioms, elegant ways to approach a problem, or practical experience
that will be useful to other users, implementers, or researchers. The key
criterion for such a paper is that it makes a contribution from which other
Haskellers can benefit. It is not enough simply to describe a standard solution
to a standard programming problem, or report on experience where you used
Haskell in the standard way and achieved the result you were expecting.
A new submission category for this year's Haskell Symposium is the tutorial.
Like with the experience report and the functional pearl, the key criterion for
such a paper is that it makes a contribution from which other Haskellers can
benefit. What distinguishes a tutorial is that its
focus is on explaining an aspect of the Haskell language and/or ecosystem in a
way that is generally useful to a Haskell audience. Tutorials for many
such topics can be found online; the distinction here is that by writing it up
for formal review it will be vetted by experts and formally published.
System demonstrations should summarize the system capabilities that would be
demonstrated. The proposals will be judged on whether the ensuing session is
likely to be important and interesting to the Haskell community at large,
whether on grounds academic or industrial, theoretical or practical, technical,
social or artistic. Please contact the program chair with any questions about
the relevance of a proposal.
If your contribution is not a research paper, please mark the title of your
experience report, functional pearl, tutorial or system demonstration as such,
by supplying a subtitle (Experience Report, Functional Pearl, Tutorial Paper, System Demonstration).
Submitted papers should be in portable document format (PDF), formatted using
the ACM SIGPLAN style guidelines. Authors should use the `acmart` format, with
the `sigplan` sub-format for ACM proceedings. For details, see:
It is recommended to use the `review` option when submitting a paper;
this option enables line numbers for easy reference in reviews.
Functional pearls, experience reports, tutorials and demo proposals should be
labelled clearly as such.
Lightweight Double-blind Reviewing
Haskell Symposium 2021 will use a lightweight double-blind reviewing process.
To facilitate this, submitted 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 the reviewers come to an initial
judgment 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 (e.g., important background references should not be
omitted or anonymized). In addition, authors should feel free to disseminate
their ideas or draft versions of their paper as they normally would. For
instance, authors may post drafts of their papers on the web or give talks on
their research ideas.
A reviewer will learn the identity of the author(s) of a paper after a review
The length of submissions should not exceed the following limits:
Regular paper: 12 pages
Functional pearl: 12 pages
Tutorial: 12 pages
Experience report: 6 pages
Demo proposal: 2 pages
There is no requirement that all pages are used. For example, a
functional pearl may be much shorter than 12 pages. In all cases,
the list of references is not counted against these page limits.
Regular track and demos:
Submission deadline: 21 May 2021 (Fri)
Notification: 23 June 2021 (Wed)
Deadlines are valid anywhere on Earth.
Submissions must adhere to SIGPLAN's republication policy
(http://sigplan.org/Resources/Policies/Republication/), and authors
should be aware of ACM's policies on plagiarism
Program Committee members are allowed to submit papers, but their papers will
be held to a higher standard.
The paper submission deadline and length limitations are firm.
There will be no extensions, and papers violating the length
limitations will be summarily rejected.
Papers should be submitted through HotCRP at:
Improved versions of a paper may be submitted at any point before the
submission deadline using the same web interface.
Supplementary material: Authors have the option to attach supplementary
material to a submission, on the understanding that reviewers may choose not
to look at it. This supplementary material should not be submitted as part of
the main document; instead, it should be uploaded as a separate PDF document
or tarball. Supplementary material should be uploaded at submission time, not by
providing a URL in the paper that points to an external repository.
Authors can distinguish between anonymized and non-anonymized supplementary
material. Anonymized supplementary material will be visible to reviewers
immediately; non-anonymized supplementary material will be revealed to
reviewers only after they have submitted their review of the paper and learned
the identity of the author(s).
Resubmitted Papers: authors who submit a revised version of a paper that has
previously been rejected by another conference have the option to attach an
annotated copy of the reviews of their previous submission(s), explaining how
they have addressed these previous reviews in the present submission. If a
reviewer identifies him/herself as a reviewer of this previous submission and
wishes to see how his/her comments have been addressed, the conference chair
will communicate to this reviewer the annotated copy of his/her previous
review. Otherwise, no reviewer will read the annotated copies of the previous
Accepted papers will be included in the ACM Digital Library. Their authors
will be required to choose one of the following options:
- Author retains copyright of the work and grants ACM a non-exclusive
permission-to-publish license (and, optionally, licenses the work with a
Creative Commons license);
- Author retains copyright of the work and grants ACM an exclusive
- Author transfers copyright of the work to ACM.
For more information, please see ACM Copyright Policy
(http://www.acm.org/publications/policies/copyright-policy) and ACM Author
Accepted proposals for system demonstrations will be posted on the
symposium website but not formally published in the proceedings.
Publication date: The official publication date of accepted papers is
the date the proceedings 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.
Authors of accepted papers are encouraged to make auxiliary material (artifacts
like source code, test data, etc.) available with their paper. They can opt to
have these artifacts published alongside their paper in the ACM Digital Library
(copyright of artifacts remains with the authors).
If an accepted paper's artifacts are made permanently available for retrieval in a
publicly accessible archival repository like the ACM Digital Library, that paper
qualifies for an Artifacts Available badge
Applications for such a badge can be made after paper acceptance and will be
reviewed by the PC chair.
Edwin Brady University of St Andrews
Koen Claessen Chalmers University of Technology
Dominique Devriese Vrije Universiteit Brussel
Andy Gill University of Kansas
Jurriaan Hage (chair) Universiteit Utrecht
Zhenjiang Hu Peking University
Ranjit Jhala University of California
Patricia Johann Appalachian State University
Yukiyoshi Kameyama University of Tsukuba
George Karachalias Tweag
Ralf Laemmel University of Koblenz-Landau
Daan Leijen Microsoft Research
Ben Lippmeier Ghost Locomotion
Neil Mitchell Facebook
Alberto Pardo Universidad de la Republica, Uruguay
Matt Roberts Macquarie University
Janis Voigtlaender University of Duisburg-Essen
Nicolas Wu Imperial College London
If you have questions, please contact the chair at: j.hage at uu.nl
More information about the Haskell-Cafe