This document is intended to serve as a set of guidelines for submissions to the 50th IEEE/ACM International Symposium on Computer Architecture (ISCA 2023). The format is derived from the IEEE template's IEEEtran.cls file, and is used with an objective of keeping the submission version similar to the camera ready version. In an effort to respect the efforts of reviewers and in the interest of fairness to all prospective authors, we request that all submissions to ISCA 2023 follow the formatting and submission rules detailed below. Submissions that violate these instructions may not be reviewed, at the discretion of the program chair, in order to maintain a review process that is fair to all potential authors.
The committee will make every effort to judge each submitted paper on its own merits. There will be no target acceptance rate. We expect to accept a wide range of papers with appropriate expectations for evaluation – while papers that build on significant past work with strong evaluations are valuable, papers that open new areas with less rigorous evaluation are equally welcome and especially encouraged. We also acknowledge the wide range of evaluation methodologies in ISCA including modeling, simulation, prototyping, experimental implementation, real product evaluation, etc.
Papers must be submitted in printable PDF format and should contain a maximum of 11 pages of single-spaced two-column text, not including references. You may include any number of pages for references, but see below for more instructions.
If you use a different software package to typeset your paper, then please adhere to the guidelines given in the table below. Please ensure that you include page numbers with your submission. This makes it easier for the reviewers to refer to different parts of your paper when they provide comments. Please ensure that your submission has a banner at the top of the title page, which contains the submission number and the notice of confidentiality.
|Page Limit||11 pages, not including references|
|Paper Size||US Letter: 8.5in x 11in|
|Body||2-column, single spaced|
|Space Between Columns||0.25in|
|Line Spacing (Leading)||11pt|
|Body Font||10pt, Times|
|Abstract Font||10pt, Times|
|Section Heading Font||12pt, bold|
|Subsection Heading Font||10pt, bold|
|Caption Font||9pt (minimum), bold|
|References||8pt, no page limit, list all authors' names|
Reviewing will be double blind: please do not include any author names on any submitted documents except in the space provided on the submission form. You must also ensure that the metadata included in the PDF does not give away the authors. If you are improving upon your prior work, refer to your prior work in the third person and include a full citation for the work in the bibliography. For example, if you are building on your own prior work in the papers, you would say something like: “While the authors of [x][y] did X, Y, and Z, this paper additionally does W, and is therefore much better.” Do NOT omit or anonymize references for blind review. There is one exception to this for your own prior work that appeared in IEEE CAL, arXiv, workshops without archived proceedings, etc., as discussed later in this document.
Ensure that the figures and tables are legible. Please also ensure that you refer to your figures in the main text. Many reviewers print the papers in gray-scale. Therefore, if you use colors for your figures, ensure that the different colors are highly distinguishable in grayscale.
There is no length limit for references. Each reference must explicitly list all authors of the paper. Papers not meeting this requirement will be rejected. Authors of NSF proposals should be familiar with this requirement. Knowing all authors of related work will help find the best reviewers. Since there is no length limit for the number of pages used for references, there is no need to save space here.
IEEE guidelines dictate that authorship should be based on a substantial intellectual contribution. It is assumed that all authors have had a significant role in the creation of an article that bears their names. In particular, the authorship credit must be reserved only for individuals who have met each of the following conditions:
A detailed description of the IEEE authorship guidelines and responsibilities is available here. Per these guidelines, it is not acceptable to award honorary authorship or gift authorship. Please keep these guidelines in mind while determining the author list of your paper.
Declare all the authors of the paper upfront. Addition/removal of authors once the paper is accepted will have to be approved by the program chair, since it potentially undermines the goal of eliminating conflicts for reviewer assignment.
Authors should indicate these areas on the submission form as well as specific topics covered by the paper for optimal reviewer match. If you are unsure whether your paper falls within the scope of ISCA, please check with the program chair – ISCA is a broad, multidisciplinary conference and encourages new topics.
Authors must register all their conflicts on the paper submission site. Conflicts are needed to ensure appropriate assignment of reviewers. If a paper is found to have an undeclared conflict that causes a problem OR if a paper is found to declare false conflicts in order to abuse or “game” the review system, the paper may be rejected.
Please declare a conflict of interest with the following people for any author of your paper. A conflict occurs in the following cases:
"Service" collaborations such as co-authoring a report for a professional organization, serving on a program committee, or co-presenting tutorials, do not themselves create a conflict of interest. Co-authoring a paper that is a compendium of various projects with no true collaboration among the projects does not constitute a conflict among the authors of the different projects.
On the other hand, there may be others not covered by the above with whom you believe a COI exists, for example, an ongoing collaboration which has not yet resulted in the creation of a paper or proposal. Please report such COIs; however, you may be asked to justify them. Please be reasonable. For example, you cannot declare a COI with a reviewer just because that reviewer works on topics similar to or related to those in your paper. The program chair may contact co-authors to explain a COI whose origin is unclear.
Most reviews will be solicited among the members of the program committee and the external review committee but other members from the community may also write reviews. Please declare all your conflicts (not just restricted to the PC and ERC) on the submission form. When in doubt, contact the program chair.
By submitting a manuscript to ISCA 2023, the authors guarantee that the manuscript has not been previously published or accepted for publication in a substantially similar form in any conference, journal, or the archived proceedings of a workshop (e.g., in the ACM/IEEE digital library) – see exceptions below. The authors also guarantee that no paper that contains significant overlap with the contributions of the submitted paper will be under review for any other conference or journal or an archived proceedings of a workshop during the ISCA 2023 review period. Violation of any of these conditions will lead to rejection.
The only exceptions to the above rules are for the authors' own papers in (1) workshops without archived proceedings such as in the ACM/IEEE digital library (or where the authors chose not to have their paper appear in the archived proceedings), or (2) venues such as IEEE CAL or arXiv where there is an explicit policy that such publication does not preclude longer conference submissions. In all such cases, the submitted manuscript may ignore the above work to preserve author anonymity. This information must, however, be provided on the submission form – the PC chair will make this information available to reviewers if it becomes necessary to ensure a fair review. If you have already put your manuscript on arXiv, in the interest of double blind review, modify the title for the version you submit to ISCA. As always, if you are in doubt, it is best to contact the program chair (TBA).
This document is derived from previous conferences, in particular ISCA 2023.