Whatever model is used for the presentation, it does not seem unrealistic to set up a telephone conference with one of the main authors during the Q&A so that questions can get answers there and then even if the author can not be present in person. How hard could that be for networking people? Really?
/Lars-Åke Larzon
4 dec 2009 kl. 08.29 skrev Petri Mähönen:
>
> Like Joerg I think that it is a bit of issue of a judgment and the gray
> areas stay. We have had to
> fact that also in SECON (Rome) and DySPAN lately.
>
> I would prefer to go for "soft push" for saying that in principle the
> *authors* should present their
> papers, and in the case of blatant and continuous violation of this
> rule, chairs can take an action
> (up to taking paper out of Explorer distribution). But this should be
> done after serious violation(s).
> In fact, the current IEEE ruling stating that papers must be presented
> or otherwise there is
> a possibility that chairs decide that it is not going to be in Explorer
> was implicitly assuming that
> the paper is presented by one of the authors. It did not come to serious
> consideration that this
> would not be the case.
>
> The gray-ish area stays, however, almost inevitably. One needs to use a
> bit of common sense
> and judgment to gauge how reasonable and believable the reasons for not
> presenting are. I do
> not necessarily have a big problem sometimes on this. For example this
> year I was chairing
> a session and we had simply an excellent substitute. He had been really
> briefed into the paper,
> was also working in the field etc. Simply a good presentation and was
> able to answer the questions.
> This was much more better than another case, where we had an author, who
> was presenting
> probably 3-5 papers written by his students, and was not able to answer
> many of the questions
> although being nominally the author. So if the annoyance level is
> generated by "not able to answer
> questions" argument (alone), then having the author does not necessarily
> guarantee anything.
>
> My take on the serious violations on the game rules would be repeated
> non-author presentations,
> especially in the mode "we will send one person to present all 10 papers
> from our institute". I know
> that for many this might be a funding issue etc., but regardless these
> are typically the problem
> cases. Occasional covers are not, but almost an institutional strategies
> to send only one presenter
> for a flood of papers typically ends up to the situation what Lars was
> describing.
>
> My take from 4-6 conferences I have been more deeply involved in is
> following:
>
> * Few cases with very believable and good reasons: sudden illness,
> institutional travel restrictions
> (couple for flu epidemics, one for sudden cost reduction reasons), and I
> think I had even one
> surprise wedding. These people were also making a pre-contact on warning
>
> * More cases with no forewarning at all, and mixed bag of explanations.
>
> * About 3-5 cases, where I was spotting this sort of maximal number of
> paper for minimal number
> of presenters. Thus having only one person presenting huge number of
> papers from the same
> institution. One case was serious enough that I had a friendly
> discussion with the person on trying
> to understand a logic and to tell that this is not really what the
> community and conferences are
> expecting.
>
> -- Petri
>
>
>> While I agree with the basic idea, as you say, this is a judgment
>> call per case, under rare circumstances.
>>
>> We had very few (<=3) non-author presentations at WoWMoM this year;
>> some people simply had travel bans from their institutions due to
>> swine flu. (Now, it is an interesting question how to count travel
>> bans due to budget; I'd say this is simply different.)
>>
>> So, while I basically agree with you that an author should come and
>> make all effort to present, a gray-ish area will remain.
>>
>> Btw, the conference venue may also have an impact on how many people
>> make the effort or are allowed to go. "May I go to Hawaii, I got
>> this paper there..." may cause some raised eyebrows.
>>
>> It would be interesting to sample this over different conferences
>> and venues to understand the origins of the problem.
>>
>> That said, I have seen repeated inquiries this year, asking me what
>> happens if a person gets a paper accepted and cannot present. So,
>> we probably need to take some action.
>>
>> Joerg
>>
>> Gaurav Somani wrote:
>>
>>> Very true. A restriction on at least one author registration should be
>>> modified to at least one author attendee. In any case there is a problem
>>> regarding their presence than the presentation should be directly uploaded
>>> instead of presenting by anyone. A conference has a main motive of
>>> discussing the issues and getting feedback on your work.
>>>
>>> Gaurav Somani
>>> LNMIIT, Jaipur
>>>
>>> On Fri, Dec 4, 2009 at 9:34 AM, Lars Eggert <lars.eggert@nokia.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> in the past, we had problems that accepted papers didn't get presented,
>>>> when authors would not show up at the conference. This has since been fixed,
>>>> usually by requiring a presentation before accepted papers are published in
>>>> the digital library.
>>>>
>>>> My impression at GLOBECOM this year is that roughly 1/3 of the papers are
>>>> presented by someone other than the authors. This usually means that it is
>>>> impossible to ask any substantial questions. Several authors actually
>>>> directly end with a slide that says "send questions to the authors by
>>>> email."
>>>>
>>>> One of the main attractions of attending a conference IMO is being able to
>>>> interact with the authors, both in the session and during the breaks. When
>>>> authors aren't here, that's not possible and the value of the conference is
>>>> greatly diminished. I might as well watch a YouTube video of the talk.
>>>>
>>>> (I do understand that sometimes visa issues, etc. can prevent an author
>>>> from attending a conference on short notice. But I don't believe this
>>>> explains the large number of cases I see here.)
>>>>
>>>> An easy fix would be to require presentation of a paper *by an author*
>>>> before it's published. I'm wondering what others think of this idea?
>>>>
>>>> Lars
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Tccc mailing list
>>>> Tccc@lists.cs.columbia.edu
>>>> https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/cucslists/listinfo/tccc
>>>>
>>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Tccc mailing list
>>> Tccc@lists.cs.columbia.edu
>>> https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/cucslists/listinfo/tccc
>>>
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Tccc mailing list
>> Tccc@lists.cs.columbia.edu
>> https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/cucslists/listinfo/tccc
>>
> _______________________________________________
> Tccc mailing list
> Tccc@lists.cs.columbia.edu
> https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/cucslists/listinfo/tccc
_______________________________________________
Tccc mailing list
Tccc@lists.cs.columbia.edu
https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/cucslists/listinfo/tccc
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment