[Tccc] ComSoc technical ...
CCNY
habibatccny.cuny.edu
Sun Jun 2 13:44:18 EDT 2013
I second the opinions of some colleagues here that such attempts at quantifying
the "best conferences" with a set of metrics is wrong as well as inutile.
It is tempting to design a template by which conferences could be measured and
thus passing the process of judging conferences to a computer. However this
approach is just wrong and is not the right discussion to improve the overall
efficacy of conferences.
This is not the same process by which food critics judge a restaurant by
factors like menu, taste, presentation, cleanliness, decor, service, and others
Fortunately enough the process of selecting noteworthy scientific papers for
presentation is by far quite involved and could not be quantified by
straightforward simple parameters.
It takes years of experience and practice for one to be capable of passing a
thorough opinion on an event or even a paper.
Prof Ibrahim Habib
Sent from my iPhone
On Jun 2, 2013, at 7:07 PM, Marco Mellia <mel... at tlc.polito.it> wrote:
> something like this ?
> http://www.cs.ucsb.edu/~almeroth/conf/stats/
>
> --
> Marco Mellia - Assistant Professor
> Dipartimento di Elettronica e Telecomunicazioni
> Politecnico di Torino
> Corso Duca Degli Abruzzi 24
> 10129 - Torino - IT
> Tel: +39-011-090-4173
> Cel: +39-331-6714789
> Skype: mgmellia
> Home page: http://www.tlc-networks.polito.it/mellia
>
> Il giorno 2Jun, 2013, alle ore 5:59 PM, Giuseppe Bianchi
> <giuseppe.bian... at uniroma2.it> ha scritto:
>
>>
>>> In replacement of "acceptance rate", once a friend tried to convince me
>>> about adding some factors as the absolute number of submited/accepted
>>> papers and the number of attendees. Perhaps he is right and acceptance rate
>>> just make sense if we analyze all conference context.
>> Loosely related to your comment, I'd definitely like to see something
>> like the below table, maintained by the crypto and security community,
>> also for networking conferences.
>>
>> http://icsd.i2r.a-star.edu.sg/staff/jianying/conference-ranking.html
>>
>> True, senior persons here around can easily "guess" what are the events
>> which would be at the top according to these criteria (and hence where
>> it is really worth to submit your best work), but having it black on
>> white would be quite instructive (esp. if we further account for
>> attendees per track).
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> IEEE Communications Society Tech. Committee on Computer Communications
>> (TCCC) - for discussions on computer networking and communication.
>> Tccc at lists.cs.columbia.edu
>> https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/cucslists/listinfo/tccc
>
> _______________________________________________
> IEEE Communications Society Tech. Committee on Computer Communications
> (TCCC) - for discussions on computer networking and communication.
> Tccc at lists.cs.columbia.edu
> https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/cucslists/listinfo/tccc
_______________________________________________
IEEE Communications Society Tech. Committee on Computer Communications
(TCCC) - for discussions on computer networking and communication.
Tccc at lists.cs.columbia.edu
https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/cucslists/listinfo/tccc
More information about the Tccc
mailing list