This document is intended to serve as a set of guidelines for submissions to the 56th IEEE/ACM International Symposium on Microarchitecture® (MICRO 2023). The submission template is derived from the ACM sig-alternate.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 MICRO 2023 follow the formatting and submission rules detailed below. Submissions that violate these instructions may not be reviewed, at the discretion of the program chairs, 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.
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 additional instructions. If you are using LaTeX to typeset your paper, then we recommend that you use our template. The sample paper was prepared with that template. Note that the template and sample paper may render slightly differently on different LaTeX engines, due to typesetting changes between versions. If in doubt about any aspect of formatting, refer to the sample paper for guidance.
If you use a different software package to typeset your paper, then please adhere to the guidelines given in the table below. 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. You must fully anonymize any links to artifacts (e.g., GitHub repository) and remove any links to artifacts that cannot be fully anonymized. Papers that violate the anonymization policy may be rejected without review at the discretion of the program chairs.
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 (i.e., do not use et al. to truncate the list of authors). Papers not meeting this requirement will be rejected. 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.
ACM and 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:
For more information, please read the detailed descriptions of the ACM Criteria for Authorship and the IEEE Publication Principles, covering authorship guidelines and responsibilities. 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 chairs, 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 MICRO, please check with the program chairs - MICRO is a broad, multidisciplinary conference and encourages new topics.
If the manuscript has been previously reviewed and rejected and is now being submitted to MICRO, the authors are encouaged to provide a letter explaining how the paper has been revised for this current submission. We expect this revision information to improve both the submission and the review process. Authors choosing to submit a revision letter have control of who this letter will be shared with, by specifying one of the following options:
Note that if the authors choose to submit a revision letter, they must do so by the paper submission deadline.
Authors must register all their conflicts for their paper submission. 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 without review. We use the following conflict of interest guidelines for determining the conflict period for MICRO 2023. Please declare a conflict of interest (COI) with the following people for any author of your paper:
We would also like to emphasize that the following scenarios do not constitute a conflict:
If in doubt, please contact the program chairs.
By submitting a manuscript to MICRO 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 MICRO 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 program chairs will make this information available to reviewers if it becomes necessary to ensure a fair review. As always, if you are in doubt, it is best to contact the program chairs.
Authors must not contact reviewers or PC members about any submission, including their own. This includes attempting to sway a reviewer, requesting information about any aspect of the reviewing process, and/or asking about the outcome of a submission. Similarly, authors are not allowed to ask another party to contact the reviewers on their behalf.
Authors must not disclose the content of reviews for their paper publicly (e.g., on social media) before the results are announced.
Authors must report any allegations of submission or reviewing misconduct to the program chairs. The only exception is if the complaint is about the program chairs; in this case, the Steering Committee should be contacted.
This document is derived from previous conferences, in particular MICRO 2013, ASPLOS 2015, MICRO 2015, MICRO 2016, MICRO 2017, MICRO 2018, MICRO 2019, MICRO 2020, MICRO 2021, and MICRO 2022 as well as SIGARCH/TCCA's Recommended Best Practices for the Conference Reviewing Process.