Database Publication Practices Surajit Chaudhuri Microsoft Research.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Doc.: IEEE /XXXr0 Submission March, 2004 Matthew Sherman, BAE SystemsSlide 1 Keep 802 Together Proposal Date: March 15, 2003 Point of Contact:
Advertisements

CSTA funding task force Alain Chesnais. Task Force Address request that SIGs fund CSTA at $100K per year over the next five years Mission: to put together.
Two Issues Concerning Research Conferences Dave Patterson October 2004.
SIG Best Practices: Open Business Meetings William G. Griswold Chair, SIGSOFT Computer Science & Engineering UC San Diego From the SIGSOFT Bylaws (proposed)
2013 CRA-W Graduate Cohort Workshop Publishing Your Research Yanlei Diao University of Massachusetts Amherst.
PhD in Databases. introduction why PhD in databases? –everyone should have a reason! which topic should I choose? –usually the supervisor does it for.
Feedback from the November Task Force What will we do today? Remind people about the New plan for the County Board and Task Force Share the views of the.
Work Flows of the Online Review System Copernicus Office Editor Copernicus Publications | April 2014.
We are Under Attack. We are Under Attack By the Least Publishable Unit.
Course Missive CS2750 Spring In Deo Speramus Brown.
Instructions for PhD Students
Chapter 8: Foundations of Group Behavior
Database Publication Practices: Recap of SIGMOD 2004 Panel Zachary G. Ives University of Pennsylvania May 11, 2015 VLDB 2005, Trondheim, Norway.
Publishing Journal Articles Simon Hix Prof. of European & Comparative Politics LSE Government Department My experience How journals work Choosing a journal.
How Not to Get Your Paper Rejected Mainak Chaudhuri Indian Institute of Technology, Kanpur.
Towards a Model of Computer Systems Research Tom Anderson University of Washington.
Sigmetrics Organizing Committee General Chair: Zhen Liu (IBM Research) PC Co-Chairs: Vishal Misra (Columbia University) Prashant Shenoy (University.
ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOR W W W. P R E N H A L L. C O M / R O B B I N S T E N T H E D I T I O N.
Current Situation Strong tradition going back to the 1980s (with very little changes even if community has exploded) Highly competitive/selective conferences.
SYSTEMS SUPPORT FOR GRAPHICAL LEARNING Ken Birman 1 CS6410 Fall /18/2014.
Solid Performance Solutions This presentation was created to give you the ideas and support to present “Rethinking New Product Training Development” in.
Lowering the Technology Barrier: Assigning Collaborative Web Projects Scott E. Siddall Denison University Copyright Scott E. Siddall, This work is.
CRA-W Promotion & Tenure Dilma Da Silva, Chair Texas A&M Kathryn S McKinley, Microsoft Research.
A preliminary analysis of AAAI-99 submissions Devika Subramanian Rice University.
ASPLOS 2015 Debate Onur Mutlu
Science of Security Experimentation John McHugh, Dalhousie University Jennifer Bayuk, Jennifer L Bayuk LLC Minaxi Gupta, Indiana University Roy Maxion,
REU PI Meeting Best Practices Chair: Masoud Milani Scribe: Behrooz Shirazi April 27, 2007.
SIG Orientation: Publications Bernard Rous Deputy Director of Publications October 25, 2009.
The KDD 2008 review process (Research track) Bing Liu & Sunita Sarawagi.
EVALUATING PAPERS KMS quality- Impact on Competitive Advantage Proceedings of the 41 st Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences
How to start research V. Jayalakshmi. Why do we research? – To solve a problem – To satisfy an itch – To gain more market share/ Develop and improve –
VLDB 2005 Technical Program Report Christian S. Jensen Technical Program Chair with Klemens Böhm, Klaus R. Dittrich, Laura Haas, Martin Kersten, Masaru.
The Role of TODS in Database Publishing and VLDB-to-SIGMOD Resubmission Christian S. Jensen With contributions from Richard T. Snodgrass.
Georgia Institute of Technology Publish or Perish Gilda Barabino, Ph.D. Vice Provost for Academic Diversity Professor and Associate Chair for Graduate.
No man’s land or promised land? The lure of local public service delivery contracts for social enterprise Alex Murdock London South Bank University London.
Ratemaking Research Working Party Stewart Gleason, Ph.D., ACAS, ASA, MAAA CAS Research Initiatives Coordinator Senior Vice President Guy Carpenter & Company,
How to Satisfy Reviewer B and Other Thoughts on the Publication Process: Reviewers’ Perspectives Don Roy Past Editor, Marketing Management Journal.
Scientific Papers Chemical Literature Prepared by Dr. Q. Wang.
Publishing – or How to get Out of Grad School Henning Schulzrinne Dept. of Computer Science Columbia University.
FOR 500 The Publication Process Karl Williard & John Groninger.
© The McGraw-Hill Companies, Software Project Management 4th Edition Step Wise: An approach to planning software projects Chapter 2.
Ian F. C. Smith Writing a Conference Paper. 2 Disclaimer This is mostly opinion. Suggestions are incomplete. There are other strategies.
Coping Skills.
Software project management (intro)
Publication Strategies Gregg Rothermel Professor and Jensen Chair of Software Engineering Department of Computer Science and Engineering University of.
The Reviewing Process Marie desJardins AAAI-13 Panel Conference Reviewing Best Practices.
ACM Yan Timanovsky Ed Council August ACM Outline –The general state of ACM –International initiatives –Strategic initiatives.
INFO 4990: Information Technology Research Methods Guide to the Research Literature Lecture by A. Fekete (based in part on materials by J. Davis and others)
Publication Etc.. Disclaimer This is a complex and emotional topic. – There are many facets of the problem. – Any “solution” will have good and bad points.
Scholarship Skills Andrew Black 1 Lecture 13 Conference Papers Andrew Black & Tim Sheard Portland State University.
Some problems with systems research in Europe Miguel Castro.
© 2006 ACM/IEEEHealth of Conferences Committee Health of Conferences Committee Update February 10, SIG Governing Board Meeting Mark D. Hill (Committee.
Director of Emerging Initiatives Activities related to FY12 Goal 2 Semahat Demir, Ph.D
How to Really Review Papers CS 8803 AIC. Prvulovic: CORD 2 Paper Reviewing Algorithm Read the paper Think about it Take a look at related work Leave it.
Sept 17, 2007C.Watters 1 Reviewing Published Articles.
Easy Chair Online Conference Submission, Tracking and Distribution Process: Getting Started AMS WMC and AMS Annual Conferences Click on play to begin show.
Term Project Proposal By J. H. Wang Apr. 7, 2017.
Publishing a paper.
Beijing University of Technology, China, September 28, 2006
Publication Strategies
CSC 682: Advanced Computer Security
Provost’s Merit Pay Initiative
How to Really Review Papers
Chapter 8 Foundations of Group Behavior
The Process of Getting Published: Reviews and Rejection
From results to submission
CAM2018 DIGITAL DISRUPTION FOR INNOVATING SHARED VALUES
CPSC 699 Fall 2014 PubliCATIONS.
Computer Science Publications
2 Old-Fashioned Problems
Presentation transcript:

Database Publication Practices Surajit Chaudhuri Microsoft Research

Coping with Growth u Issue: Higher submission rate u We are not alone in facing this problem –What are others thinking? –ACM SGB Task Force on the Impact of Increasing Conference Submissions (Chair: Alexander L. Wolf) – next 4 slides u My analysis and some painful suggestions

Basis of SGB Task Force Data u ASE ( ) u DAC ( ) u DATE ( ) u EComm ( ) u FOCS ( ) u FSE ( ) u GLSVLSI ( ) u ICSE ( ) u ICSM ( ) u ISSTA ( ) u Middleware ( ) u MobiCom ( ) u MobiHoc ( ) u MobiSys ( ) u PODC ( ) u PODS ( ) u POPL ( ) u SCG ( ) u SIGCOMM ( ) u SODA ( ) u SPAA ( ) u STOC ( ) u UML ( ) u UAI ( )

MobiCom ( )

Observations/Perceptions: Stature/Workload u Conferences with lowering acceptance rates receiving more polished papers on narrower topics u Pressure to publish in top venues –CS argued that conferences more important than journals; now we are suffering for it –grad students expected to publish in top places u Between a rock and hard place –grow PC, but lose coordination –shrink PC, but lose quality of reviews u Vicious cycle –people agreeing to do more PCs (can’t say no) –people do less per PC

Most Radical Idea u Rethink the role of conferences –reduce importance w.r.t. journals –reduce number and increase acceptance rates –conference presentations derived from “best” journal submissions (rather than vice versa) –make tenure evaluation based on quality of top five papers, not number of papers u Journals have better scale properties –larger reviewer pool –less time pressure on authors and reviewers

My Analysis and Suggestions (No implication for SIGMOD06)

Request to the Steering Committees u Experimenting with procedural changes –Observe –Make only one significant change for a while –Observe u Avoid second-order changes that do not address the pain point

Second Order Issues u Double-blind reviewing –Expected to impact on selection of “border-line” papers –Many ACM SIGs follow »SIGGRAPH, AAAI, SIGCOMM u Author Feedback –Good for “venting” –Tight timeline for reviewing makes it ineffective

Accommodating Growth u Acceptance rate –Acceptance rate is 15%, 20% or 39%? »Do the math! –Not lower than many other large conferences –Mandated changes seem unreasonable u Diversity and Narrowing of Topics –AAAI: “Big Ideas”, Tech papers, Abstracts –Independent conferences as tracks (like WWW) –Reuse journals as publication u Program Constraints –Presentation decoupled from acceptance –Posters and Plenary (old KDD style)

Impact on Reviewing Infrastructure u Choice of PC members crucial –Quality of Papers highly correlated with PC members u “Everyone is a PC member” –VLDB05: 610 reviewers u Large PC has likely to have high variability –VLDB05: 610 reviewers –But, otherwise 3-review load is too high u Suggestions (next 2 slides) –Short-cuts in reviewing process –Throttle the “flow” of papers

Reviewing Quality/Load u 2-level PC (but reduce dependence on external reviewers) [like AAAI, SIGGRAPH] –Senior PC member nominates –Handles 4/5 papers –Good training for future PC experience u Early Rejection –If a paper gets 2 “weak” rejects, it is rejected without a third review u General Chairs should yield more time to reviewing –Electronic PC requires it –Electronic Proceedings make it easy u We should learn/coordinate with broader CS community

Throttle the flow u No other ACM SIG engineers pipeline –SIGGRAPHICS or EuroGraphics –Mobicom or SIGCOMM –Takes motivation away to make serious changes u Selectively “break the pipeline” –VLDB-> ICDE –SIGMOD -> VLDB (except for roll-over papers) u Send the right (not polite) message –Weak Reject” vs. “Reject” –Very short reviews for bottom 10% - 20%

More Serious Issues beyond Publication Practices u Legacy of mid’80s – mid 90’s –Parallel DBMS, Query Optimization –Debate between deductive DB and OODB washed away! u Jury is still out on the last decade? u Today: –Are there too many problem statements? –Everyone working on “personalized” problems –Many “fuzzy” problems with “fuzzy” yardstick for solutions? –Worry: Weakening link to systems/hard engineering