2. The Role of TODS in Database Publishing and VLDB-to-SIGMOD Resubmission Christian S. Jensen With contributions from Richard T. Snodgrass

3. TODS Turnaround Time in Months First RoundOverall YearAverageMaxAverageMax 20023.47.13.47.1 20032.96.52.96.5 20043.05.02.95.0

4. TODS Acceptance Time in Months Year Initially SubmittedMinimumAverageMaximum 20025.512.831.7 20034.010.119.5

5. TODS Submission and Acceptance Rates YearNumber Submitted Acceptance Rate 20026038% 20037235% 200479—

6. TODS Article Length per Volume

7. TODS Total Pages per Volume

8. Statistics – Summary Turnaround time and acceptance time are both way down. The average turnaround time for TODS is equivalent to that of this VLDB conference! TODS volumes have increasingly more papers and are thus fatter. TODS is very healthy.

9. TODS Versus the VLDB Conference Both offer very fast turnaround times. Both publish very high quality papers. Both appear in the ACM Digital Library and SIGMOD DiSC and Anthology. VLDB offers a faster end-to-end time. VLDB allows you to present your paper. VLDB has the more liberal copyright policy. TODS offers multiple rounds (but this may also happen for VLDB). TODS offers more pages per article. TODS welcomes surveys and short papers. TODS allows submissions any time. TODS has much auxiliary material on its web site. Conclusion: Each has its place.

10. Prognosis http://www.informatik.uni-trier.de/~ley/db/about/top.html Lists top 120 papers wrt. citations; covers 100,000 citations 30 TODS papers appear on this list; 31 papers are from all other journals combined. TODS also dominates all conferences. TODS will continue to be the (or, a main) venue for the “version for the ages” of the best ideas. TODS is differently positioned to deal with the onslaught of submissions than are conferences such as VLDB. Multiple rounds Referees chosen specially for each submission Much smaller reviewing load per referee Reviewing spread out across the year

11. VLDB-to-SIGMOD Resubmission As at test, authors of ten papers were invited to resubmit a revised version of their VLDB 2005 submission to SIGMOD 2006. Resubmission with memory The VLDB 2005 reviewers follow the paper. The reviewers receive the original submission, the original reviews, and a revision report There was no guarantee of acceptance at SIGMOD 2006.

12. Resubmission Procedure The VLDB submission is revised according to the VLDB reviews. The revision is submitted according to the SIGMOD guidelines together with a revision report. Reviewed by the original VLDB 2005 reviewers and one SIGMOD 2006 PC member. The original VLDB submission and reviews are made available to the reviewers.

13. Experiences The authors of four papers chose to submit elsewhere Most likely ICDE (for three of the papers) One author comment “We were considering submitting the paper to ICDE/ICDM, etc. but we now feel that a submission to SIGMOD is more attractive.” Potential volume The number of SIGMOD-to-VLDB resubmissions was ca. 100 for year 2005 (26% of all papers that did not make it at SIGMOD). Possible next steps Another small experiment. Allow resubmission of any paper with an average score above some number. Include ICDE and EDBT