This question is specific to computer science.
I have an MA in three humanities subjects, but conduct computer science research in my current position in a research project (the actual topic of the project is not in the CS domain).
In preparation for a PhD in CS I have talked to potential supervisors (generally open to take on my thesis) who suggested to publish in a CS-related publication before trying to convince the department’s examination board that I generally qualify for a PhD in CS.
I am currently preparing a paper which discusses some of the foundations of my research. My question to people from CS is: Which of the following publication options would potentially convince a CS examination board the most?
Timing plays some part in my decision, as I want to start the PhD process sooner rather than later.
The options are:
- Submit to a workshop at an IEEE conference, with publication in the conference proceedings (IEEEXplore, under the workshop heading). Submission deadline is fairly close, and I’m fairly confident that my paper might be accepted.
- Submit to a special issue of an IEEE journal which would covers my research area enough to warrant a submission. Submission deadline is only next year, and I think the paper stands okay chances to be accepted, although I’m less certain than for option 1.
- Submit to an open access journal which broadly covers my research area (which is a bit niche I guess) but I guess doesn’t have reputation in the mainstream CS community, I can submit at any time, so no time constraints.
- Submit to a possibly more reputable IEEE journal (the same that runs the special issue referred to above), but don’t wait for the special issue but take my chances with a “normal” submission (Impact Factor of around 2).
I submitted my paper for publication in a very good computer science conference. When I got feedback for rebuttal:
I had one review that said my work wasn’t relavant to computer networking in any way, and that they couldn’t understand some abbreviations in the abstract like RIPE.
Then I had another who said that my work is very useful to the research community and even asked for a copy of the library I wrote.
Last, I had a reviewer that just told me to make my images larger and to include a better literature review.
I tried to rebut as best as I could, especially against the first review, but knowing that this is a high profile conference, what are my chances of being accepted? It really didn’t seem like the first reviwer understood much of my work.
I have the possibility to organize a special track/session at a small computer science conference, however at the moment I’m in the last year of my PhD study.
The special session includes an introduction presentation (related to an editorial) by the organizer (me in this case), some accepted papers presentations, and an “Open Discussion and Closing Remarks” chaired by me as well.
Although I believe to have enough expertise/general knowledge on the topic of the session, do you think it’d be appropriate for me as a PhD student to do this? Or is everyone expecting a doctorate or a professor to organize such sessions?
I work in physics.
Throughout my graduate career, I heard about people who have been known to see work done in a talk and subsequently catch up to that work and then-some, and attempt to publish first. I ignored this lore assuming it wasn’t really true.
Now I am presenting at a conference where there will be someone (actually a big-wig) who has a reputation for this sort of maneuver, and I don’t have a pre-print yet to post online.
Any recommendations about how to mitigate the potential for this to happen (besides being ready sooner obviously, I’m working very hard on this work). Thanks.
I’ll be attending to a conference and do a poster presentation of my master’s thesis work so far. What I’m concerned of is that my tutor wants me to also wirte a short report to be submitted as a conference proceeding.
What I’ve done so far is nothing new. I’ve just applied already existing theory and numerical codes to specific cases… which should be easy to do for people that already understands the topic and has technical expertise with the numerical code I’m using (I know there is people that do have it).
Should I just write the report or talk it with my tutor?
I am a first year Maths PhD student in Singapore.
As I am going to give my first talk at a Mathematics conference soon, I look for some tips on how to give a good talk.
While googling, I come across Terrence Tao’s blog post entitled ‘talks are not the same as paper’.
In the post, he stated in third paragraph that,
Instead, a talk should complement a paper by providing a high-level and more informal overview of the same material, especially for the more standard or routine components of the argument; this allows one to channel more of the audience’s attention onto the most interesting or important components, which can be described in more detail.
I have difficulty understanding the meaning of ‘high-level’.
After I have been accepted to present a paper at a conference, the organisers are asking me to fill in a registration form (participation and attendance are free) AND to produce proof of purchase of flight tickets. I find this bizarre and intrusive. Anyway, my travelling would happen between two capital cities in Europe (plenty of flights) and they demand the proof of purchase to include people in the first draft of the programme. It is a 3-day conference, so I would have to make travel and accommodation arrangements for 5 days many months in advance.
My adviser is chairing an upcoming conference and I am wondering as his PhD student how can I benefit from this opportunity?
Other than attending the conference itself and benefiting from that, I am interested in knowing if it is common for PhD students from the conference chair research group can:
- review submitted papers
- help with organizing the conference
- help with anything else (I am not sure if there is anything else that PhD students can help with)
I’m a computer science PhD student who is about to finish his work (fingers crossed!).
Recently I received an invitation to be a committee member of a CS conference (which i accepted), and after 2 months i was asked if i want to send a proposal for a special track to organize it as the chair (in case of the acceptance).
Honestly, I like to do that as I want to do such stuff as a part of my future academic career. It is one of the iaria conferences and is not so known, but i cannot imagine organizing a special track of a well-known conference while i’m still a PhD candidate.
Nevertheless, I’m not sure if it is generally sensible/acceptable for a not-yet-graduated PhD candidate to chair a special track?
I think I need to suggest a topic which is in the area of my expertise (for which i have 1-2 ideas), but is it a good idea to ask my supervisor to do the networking parts or to enrich the advertised themes and etc?
I am organising an upcoming conference and some of our participants were approached by Expo Housing Services, a company claiming – falsely – to be charged with arranging accommodation for our guests. The details of their operation, specifically targeting scientific conferences are explained here, in a warning on an Elsevier’s bio-science event website (in short: under some pretense credit card details are requested, loss of funds ensues) which I was able to find quickly googling “EHS scam”. However, to do that I needed to know the fraudster’s name, which changes often.
Frankly I am amazed that scientific conferences are a big enough market for the scam to persist (google search returns hits from as far as 2014), but it concerns me that I have never heard of such a scam tailored towards academics. So suppose I would like to raise awareness of this scheme. How to communicate such scams to a wider academic community?
Obviously, I figured that writing on academia.stackexchange is a good first step (also, to the best of my search skills, this topic was not raised here yet). I can of course warn colleagues in my field, but EHS does not discriminate and targets various disciplines (and operates in various countries).
There is one more question here. What reasonable measures can I take to prevent scammers from reaching my participants? EHS called two invited speakers of my conference (obtaining their numbers from their institutions’ websites, I presume), so I could simply not publish the invited speakers list. To clarify, this is a mathematics conference where we announce in advance several top-tier experts to be present and then expect members of community to register based on their interest in specific topics that these invited speakers are known to work on – you see why I don’t consider anonymity a reasonable mesure. I am very curious if in any parts of academia there are protocols in place to prevent third parties from pretending to be associated with a conference. I’m considering adding appropriate disclaimers to websites of any future events I will organise, although I am aware that a significant portion of visitors only read participant lists.
I know that I am not responsible for the unsolicited contact from EHS (to be clear, there was no leak on my end – the scammers used only public information), but at the same time I can’t shake the feeling that the very situation (or especially potential loss of money) reflects badly on me.