CICM 2018: PC Chair Report Florian Rabe Universities of - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

1

CICM 2018: PC Chair Report

Florian Rabe

Universities of Erlagen-Nuremberg and Paris-Sud

PC Chair Report 2

PC Chair Report

PC Chair Report 3

Program Committee

Chairs

◮ General Chair: Florian Rabe ◮ Calculemus: Grant Passmore ◮ DML: no dedicated track chair, handled by General Chair ◮ MKM: Bill Farmer ◮ Systems & Data & Projects & Surveys: Abdou Youssef

29 additional members

◮ ∼ 8 nominations per track chair ◮ removal of duplicates ◮ joint fine-tuning for balancing countries, fields, etc.

PC Chair Report 4

Management Systems Used

EasyChair

◮ cheapest non-free license

90 GBP paid by CICM

◮ 4 tracks: formal submissions, informal submissions, workshop&

tutorial proposals, doctoral program

◮ 2 questions in submission form (area and kind, see later) ◮ also used for handling conflicts of interest of chairs

Mailing list

◮ PC chairs, conference chair, publicity chair, upcoming general chair ◮ rarely used

GitLab repository and issue tracker

◮ access: same as mailing list ◮ heavily used: 43 issues including heavy-weight issues like “Program” ◮ far superior to mailing list

Formal Submissions 5

Formal Submissions

Formal Submissions 6

Critical Decision: Treatment of CICM Tracks

Questions

◮ Are the Calculemus/DML/MKM tracks helpful or overkill?

value of tracks decreases as CICM becomes its own brand substantial overhead for track management

◮ Does CICM want to phase out the track structure eventually?

Formal Submissions 6

Critical Decision: Treatment of CICM Tracks

Questions

◮ Are the Calculemus/DML/MKM tracks helpful or overkill?

value of tracks decreases as CICM becomes its own brand substantial overhead for track management

◮ Does CICM want to phase out the track structure eventually?

My decision: be compatible with either answer

◮ Untracked for outsiders — tracked for insiders

◮ Untracked CfP listing 3 areas of interest

“Theorem Proving and Computer Algebra”, DML, MKM

◮ Single EasyChair track for all CICM tracks ◮ Single PC with one track chair per area

all PC members could bid on all submissions

◮ Authors required to classify papers by

◮ area: TPCA, DML, MKM, general

general papers classfied by chairs

◮ kind of paper: regular, system & data, project & survey

Formal Submissions 7

Critical Decision: Treatment of CICM Tracks

S&P track separated into 2 categories

◮ Systems and Data: 5 pages, presented as teaser+demo ◮ Projects and Surveys: 15 pages, presented like regular papers

descriptions of longstanding projects deserve 15 pages descriptions of new projects should include survey-style related work

Formal Submissions 7

Critical Decision: Treatment of CICM Tracks

S&P track separated into 2 categories

◮ Systems and Data: 5 pages, presented as teaser+demo ◮ Projects and Surveys: 15 pages, presented like regular papers

descriptions of longstanding projects deserve 15 pages descriptions of new projects should include survey-style related work

Possible setup for the (long-term?) future

◮ Phase out tracks ◮ 2 PC co-chairs, e.g.,

◮ one to handle regular papers ◮ one to handle systems and dataset descriptions

◮ Would require charter change

Formal Submissions 8

Reviewing

Time Line

◮ Late submission deadline

after FLoC notification

◮ 1 week extension

yielded 7 additional submissions

◮ ∼ 8 submissions withdrawn/not completed

hard to analyze why

◮ A few days for rebuttals

used by most submissions

◮ 3 weeks for reviews

a little short

Assignment

◮ automatically by EasyChair

easy despite conflicts of interest

◮ 3 reviews per submission, 17 external reviewers ◮ ∼ 4 papers per PC member

Formal Submissions 9

Reviewing

Statistics

◮ 36 submissions (23 accepted)

◮ Calculemus: 9 (5) ◮ DML: 2 (1) ◮ MKM: 10 (7) ◮ Systems & Data: 10 (8) ◮ Surveys & Projects: 5 (2)

need clearer expectations in future

◮ Special cases

◮ 3 papers shepherded, all accepted eventually ◮ 5 preaccepted for work-in-progress, 1 took offer

Acceptance rate

◮ 64% ◮ 55% without shepherding ◮ rather high but justified by reviews

21 papers with average score > 0.7

• nly 2 of 8 borderline papers accepted

Formal Submissions 10

Statistics by Country

Formal Submissions 11

Proceedings

Publication with Springer LNAI

◮ PC Chair would need mandate from CICM to break with tradition

2019 PC chair asks for guidance

◮ 4 weeks free online access ◮ ∼ 800 EUR for 80 printed copies (including 50 free ones) ◮ alternative: USB sticks

similar price but no free copies

Possible idea for future: just take the 50 free printed copies and not everybody gets one

Other Parts of the Program 12

Other Parts of the Program

Other Parts of the Program 13

Informal Contributions

Goal: increase number of submissions

◮ Make them feel welcome: call for contributions, proceedings ◮ Make them easy: low threshold, late deadline ◮ Make them flexible: work-in-progress, demo, poster, tutorial ◮ Preaccept interesting rejected papers as work-in-progress

Partial success

◮ 7 work-in-progress submissions

◮ 4 accepted ◮ 1 preaccepted ◮ 2 rejected

◮ 3 demo submissions (3 accepted)

Other Parts of the Program 14

Workshops and Tutorials

Chair: Osman Hasan

Goal: increase number of associated events

◮ Formal call for workshops & tutorial proposals ◮ Active recruiting of individual candidates ◮ No hard deadline ◮ Financial incentive: 2 waived 1-day registration fees per event

Partial success

◮ 6 workshop submissions (2 after recommended deadline) ◮ No tutorial submissions

Other Parts of the Program 15

Doctoral Program

Chairs: Osman Hasan, Diane Gallois-Wong

◮ 1 student co-author of accepted paper chosen as chair ◮ 3 additional submissions ◮ 1 mentor per student

maybe 2 mentors — 1 attacker, 1 defender?

◮ Joint dinner for students and mentors (paid by CICM 2018) ◮ Very positive feedback

Submission easy and participation valuable — yet only few submissions

Other Parts of the Program 16

Overall Program

Goal: CICM should be pleasant to attend

◮ Slack/distractions in the program

◮ parallel sessions for workshops but no squeezing ◮ demo session ◮ early break for party, banquet

◮ Social gatherings on four evenings (thanks to local organizer)

One creative idea: special session

◮ allow program to adapt spontaneously ◮ more discussion, less unidirectional presentations ◮ could be a permanent feature

to be evaluated by next chair