Where necessary for flow, authors may add a footnote that a name is withheld for review.
Paper drafts should not be made public to reduce the possibility of inadvertently revealing author identity to reviewers.
Papers previously published or already being reviewed by another conference are not eligible.
If a closely related paper has been submitted elsewhere, the authors must notify the Program Chair as per the SIGPLAN republication policy. Reviewers are not required to read appendices, so a paper should be intelligible without them.
One of the problems facing all scientific disciplines nowadays is the general requirement that in order to be published in prominent peer-reviewed outlets, the data being presented must contain statistically significant findings.
Research Papers On Memory School Assigned To My Address
One argument put forward in favour of this approach to publishing is that without statistically significant findings (at a minimum), there is no advance in science.
The ISMM paper reviewing process is double blind: authors are not known to the reviewers and reviewers are not known to authors.
This is to authors’ benefit, since research indicates that author anonymity reduces bias in reviewing.
Authors should refer to projects and prior work in the third person, e.g.
“the XYZ project” or work by “Author et al.”, as with discussion of all related work.