[Haskell-cafe] Haskell Symposium 2022: Abstract Deadline Extended to June 1st

Nadia Polikarpova npolikarpova at eng.ucsd.edu
Sun May 29 18:52:15 UTC 2022

The Haskell'22 abstract deadline has been extended to *Wednesday, June 
1st*. Please register your submissions by this date!

The full submission deadline is still *Friday, June 3rd*.

Please find the updated CFP below.

Nadia Polikarpova (Haskell'22 chair)

  ACM SIGPLAN                                        CALL FOR SUBMISSIONS

                       Haskell Symposium 2022

                         Ljubljana, Slovenia
                  Thu 15 -- Fri 16 September, 2022



The ACM SIGPLAN Haskell Symposium 2022 will be co-located with the 2022
International Conference on Functional Programming (ICFP).

Differently from previous years, Haskell'22 will use a single-track 
submission process (that is, we will only have the regular track and no 
early track).

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 component interfaces;

   * 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
     research results.

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 appropriate.

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.

Like an experience report and a functional pearl, tutorials should make
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).

Submission Details


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 2022 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 is submitted.

Page Limits

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.


Abstract submission:     1 June 2022      (Wed)
Paper submission:        3 June 2022      (Fri)
Notification:            1 July 2022      (Fri)

Deadlines are 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 reviews.


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
   permission-to-publish license;
- 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 Rights (http://authors.acm.org/main.html).

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.

Program Committee

Lennart Augustsson        Epic Games
Jean-Philippe Bernardy    University of Gothenburg
Iavor Diatchki            Galois, Inc
Michael Gale              Tweag
William Hallahan          Yale University
Makoto Hamana             Gumma University
Andrew Hirsch 	          MPI SWS
John Hughes               Chalmers University of Technology
Alexis King               Tweag
James Koppel              Massachusets Institute of Technology
Rudy Matela               Channable
Dominic Orchard           University of Kent
Nadia Polikarpova (chair) University of California, San Diego
Eric Seidel               Bridgewater Associates
Satnam Singh              Groq
Wouter Swierstra          Utrecht University
Hiroshi Unno              University of Tsukuba
Marco Vassena             Utrecht University
Dimitrios Vytiniotis      DeepMind

If you have questions, please contact the chair at: npolikarpova at ucsd.edu


More information about the Haskell-Cafe mailing list