I fully agree with Adam!
Anthony Ephremides Distinguished University Professor and Cynthia Kim Eminent Professor of Information Technology ECE dept and ISR University of Maryland College Park, MD 20742 301-405-3641 etony(at)umd(dot) edu -----Original Message----- From: Prof. Adam Wolisz [mailto:a...@ieee.org] Sent: Saturday, June 01, 2013 10:01 AM To: Ashutosh Dutta Cc: Joe Touch; tccc@lists.cs.columbia.edu; lmfee...@sics.se Subject: Re: [Tccc] ComSoc technical cosponsorship - rating the review process Dear All, I might sound strange, but I just wonder: How many conferences addressing very similar topics should ComSoc really support? One per week? One per month? or slightly less? Is there not a risk of "inflation"? Sure - new events should have a chance, but - can we always only keep growing in numbers of events? Many people in the community complain about the flooding... should we start thinking how to handle this issue? How does this community see it? Best adam On 01.06.2013 14:46, Ashutosh Dutta wrote: Lachlan, I like the idea of having separate metrics for evaluating the continuing conferences compared to the new ones. Also, if we can find an expedited process of approving technical ComSoc co-sponsorship for the ongoing conferences (without compromising the quality), it would help the organizing committee members of those conferences. Regards Ashutosh On Sat, Jun 1, 2013 at 4:14 AM, Lachlan Andrew [1]<lachlan.and...@gmail.com>wro te: Greetings Joe, Thanks for designing this questionnaire. It looks useful. On 1 June 2013 04:10, Joe Touch [2]<to...@isi.edu> wrote: TPC meetings in person are much more effective in discussing papers than any alternative, for the same reasons as in-person conferences. In-person conferences are useful because they promote fruitful unplanned conversations that can generate new ideas and they build relationships. TPC meetings are about having a conversation on a particular topic, which may involve careful re-reading and/or verifying facts. The latter is much more suited to a multi-day on-line discussion than the former is. Another difference is that discussions at in-person conferences are between experts in the area. If all TPC members have read the paper, then I agree that an in-person discussion is the most effective option. However in cases like INFOCOM where the TPC meeting discussions deliberate only involve people who were *not* reviewers (in order to "review the reviews"), I think that the in-person meeting is less useful than a thorough on-line discussion between the reviewers. A third difference is that most conference last more than 10 hours, and so the travel cost is amortized over a much more substantial event. Coming from Australia, that travel cost is typically ~50 hours round trip (more than the hours nominally worked in a week), and equivalent to driving an SUV ~100km each day for an entire year. If that isn't daunting, I'll book you to give us a seminar sometime :) I would strongly recommend that the criterion become "Of the three media (a) long/active on-line discussion phase (b) in-person TPC meeting (c) remote-access TPC meeting, the conference: E Employs all three A Employs two out of three D Employs 0 or 1 of the three" On 31 May 2013 06:16, Joe Touch [3]<to...@isi.edu> wrote: On 5/30/2013 12:47 AM, Martin Gilje Jaatun wrote: > The problem with acceptance rates is that they are so easy to game - and according to this, a conference that receives 100 great papers and accepts 60 of them is worse than a conference that gets 1000 junk submissions and accepts 400 of them... I don't agree that this can be 'gamed' on a persistent basis. Conferences that get 100 great papers will later get 1000. It's impossible to target a voluntary audience so directly that this happens without correction over several events. That is true for conferences with a broad scope such as the flagship conferences, but not true of more specialized conferences, however high the quality. Conversely, a poor conference may continue to attract 1000 submissions because it is known to be easy to get into. I agree that acceptance rate is a useful metric, provided it isn't given undue weight. For conferences that have existed a few years, a more useful metric would be the average citations per paper over some time interval. If the IEEE could provide a script to scrape that from Google Scholar, that would be a great separate contribution. I'd love to be able to distinguish between the many conferences on a new topic (IoT, smart-grid, cloud, ...) without waiting for reputation to spread by word-of-mouth. $0.02, Lachlan -- Lachlan Andrew Centre for Advanced Internet Architectures (CAIA) Swinburne University of Technology, Melbourne, Australia [4]<http://caia.swin.edu.au/cv/landrew> Ph +61 3 9214 4837 _______________________________________________ IEEE Communications Society Tech. Committee on Computer Communications (TCCC) - for discussions on computer networking and communication. [5]Tccc@lists.cs.columbia.edu [6]https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/cucslists/listinfo/tccc _______________________________________________ IEEE Communications Society Tech. Committee on Computer Communications (TCCC) - for discussions on computer networking and communication. [7]Tccc@lists.cs.columbia.edu [8]https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/cucslists/listinfo/tccc References 1. mailto:lachlan.and...@gmail.com 2. mailto:to...@isi.edu 3. mailto:to...@isi.edu 4. http://caia.swin.edu.au/cv/landrew 5. mailto:Tccc@lists.cs.columbia.edu 6. https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/cucslists/listinfo/tccc 7. mailto:Tccc@lists.cs.columbia.edu 8. https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/cucslists/listinfo/tccc _______________________________________________ IEEE Communications Society Tech. Committee on Computer Communications (TCCC) - for discussions on computer networking and communication. Tccc@lists.cs.columbia.edu https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/cucslists/listinfo/tccc _______________________________________________ IEEE Communications Society Tech. Committee on Computer Communications (TCCC) - for discussions on computer networking and communication. Tccc@lists.cs.columbia.edu https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/cucslists/listinfo/tccc
