Hash: SHA1
Giovanni Pau wrote:
> Dear all,
>
> I think the quality of papers is measured by impact that are
> expressed fairly well by citations. In our field we assisted at an
> inlfactionary trend o both conference and journals but fortunately,
> looking to the citations factor is clear that there are 1st class
> venues and whatever venues.
>
> Is pointless to discuss about paper limiting techniques, they are
> hard to enforce and may result in loss of good papers because limit
> is reached. Taxing the submission is only a good favor to
> whatever-coms.
>
> Basically I may sound negative but I not see any solution because the
> system is anarchic and the stake holders such IEEE, ACM etc need our
> money.
This is a confusing conclusion. Neither the IEEE nor the ACM have any
direct revenues from large numbers of paper submissions. Large numbers
of submissions can backfire as well, resulting in:
- excessive parallelism (concurrent tracks)
- excessive negativism of reviewers (seeking reasons to
reject rather than reasons to encourage discussion)
- excessive splitting into separate meetings
Organizations try to strike a balance. The IEEE generally errs on the
side of being inclusive, trying to keep the accept rates higher and the
meeting in one place, at the expense of increased parallelism.
Joe
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (MingW32)
iEYEARECAAYFAksnwgMACgkQE5f5cImnZrs2igCg3ECZW4CXheHctVnLtzaG06Ij
HS0AnRHgCMakf4qG2JG7pinZ8qze07J8
=SiFs
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
Tccc mailing list
Tccc@lists.cs.columbia.edu
https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/cucslists/listinfo/tccc
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment