An Evaluation associated with the Ninth SOSP Submissions -or- How (and exactly how perhaps maybe Not) to create A systems that is good Paper
Roy Levin and David D. Redell, Ninth SOSP Program Committee Co-chairmen
On March 21, 1983, this program committee when it comes to symposium that is 9th running System Principles, having see the eighty-three documents submitted, chosen sixteen for presentation during the symposium. This acceptance ratio of approximately one out of five approximates those of previous SOSPs, even though true range submissions ended up being somewhat less than in the past few years. Several people of this system committee discovered it interestingly very easy to split the papers that are good the bad people; certainly, the ten committee users quickly agreed upon the disposition of over 80% regarding the documents. Given that acceptance ratio suggests, many of these were rejections.
Following the committee had finished its selectio n process, a few people expressed frustration into the quality that is overall of submissions. Most of the refused documents exhibited comparable weaknesses, weaknesses that the committee felt need to have been obvious towards the writers. Into the hope of increasing the standard of future SOSP submissions, and systems papers generally speaking, the committee chose to explain the requirements utilized in assessing the documents it received. This short article combines the criteria utilized by all the users of the committee, not merely the writers.
To try and avoid sounding preachy or pedagogic, we now have cast this presentation in the 1st and 2nd individual and adopted a light, sometimes funny design. (mer…)