Tweeted twitter.com/#!/StackAcademia/status/619271024543186945
2 added 1833 characters in body
source | link

My question is related to the fact that at a specific conference, if a submission is rejected then the reviewers may instead recommend that it be presented as a poster session.

Specifically, consider a paper that has no technical contribution. Rather, assume that it is a superficial survey of the main topics included in a scientific domain, i.e. This new domain should take points A, B, C, etc. into consideration, and some of these points may use technologies D, E, F as solutions. Not much literature surveyed and no results by the author included.

Now, it is my understanding that poster sessions are normally works in progress. My questions therefore are:

  • Can weak surveys fit as poster sessions? Is this normal or unheard of?
  • Using the case described in paragraph 2 above, have you witnessed papers of the same quality presented as posters at conferences? Most importantly, is this acceptable behaviour?

Thanks in advance.

Edit: In response to the discussion between xLeitix and O.R. Mapper (thank you both, honestly), I believe my use of the word superficial is a little vague. Let's for example take the combination of two large domains: virtualization and the automotive industry. Instead of the author surveying specific works integrating these two techs, let's assume the author takes the following broad and hence superficial approach:

  • The author mentions and discusses a few of the major considerations involved in virtualization.
  • The author mentions and discusses a few of the major considerations involved in vehicular networks
  • The author mentions a few of the major considerations involved in integrating virtualization and vehicular networks together.
  • The author ends the paper by discussing how some technologies may address some of the aforementioned issues. The solutions are not in themselves surveyed extensively, but more so:
    • "This person did this, that one did that to address X, etc.", without any deep or insightful comparisons.
    • "To address this issue type 2 hypervisors may be more useful", no evidence backing this claim.
    • etc..

Very brief, the paper is useful in that it groups together eloquently quite a bit of information, albeit, not in an informative way for the expert, but more so for a person starting their research in a similar domain. Hence, my dilemma; the paper would make a great article in a technical magazine, but not as a conference paper. Perhaps as a poster it would be stimulating and beneficial to the authors and for non-experts interested in the domain (possibly stimulating inter-field synergies etc.).

I have not seen something like this before, but I am not seasoned; hence, why I ask if this is acceptable, or even normal.

Note: The example given is fictional.

My question is related to the fact that at a specific conference, if a submission is rejected then the reviewers may instead recommend that it be presented as a poster session.

Specifically, consider a paper that has no technical contribution. Rather, assume that it is a superficial survey of the main topics included in a scientific domain, i.e. This new domain should take points A, B, C, etc. into consideration, and some of these points may use technologies D, E, F as solutions. Not much literature surveyed and no results by the author included.

Now, it is my understanding that poster sessions are normally works in progress. My questions therefore are:

  • Can weak surveys fit as poster sessions? Is this normal or unheard of?
  • Using the case described in paragraph 2 above, have you witnessed papers of the same quality presented as posters at conferences? Most importantly, is this acceptable behaviour?

Thanks in advance.

My question is related to the fact that at a specific conference, if a submission is rejected then the reviewers may instead recommend that it be presented as a poster session.

Specifically, consider a paper that has no technical contribution. Rather, assume that it is a superficial survey of the main topics included in a scientific domain, i.e. This new domain should take points A, B, C, etc. into consideration, and some of these points may use technologies D, E, F as solutions. Not much literature surveyed and no results by the author included.

Now, it is my understanding that poster sessions are normally works in progress. My questions therefore are:

  • Can weak surveys fit as poster sessions? Is this normal or unheard of?
  • Using the case described in paragraph 2 above, have you witnessed papers of the same quality presented as posters at conferences? Most importantly, is this acceptable behaviour?

Thanks in advance.

Edit: In response to the discussion between xLeitix and O.R. Mapper (thank you both, honestly), I believe my use of the word superficial is a little vague. Let's for example take the combination of two large domains: virtualization and the automotive industry. Instead of the author surveying specific works integrating these two techs, let's assume the author takes the following broad and hence superficial approach:

  • The author mentions and discusses a few of the major considerations involved in virtualization.
  • The author mentions and discusses a few of the major considerations involved in vehicular networks
  • The author mentions a few of the major considerations involved in integrating virtualization and vehicular networks together.
  • The author ends the paper by discussing how some technologies may address some of the aforementioned issues. The solutions are not in themselves surveyed extensively, but more so:
    • "This person did this, that one did that to address X, etc.", without any deep or insightful comparisons.
    • "To address this issue type 2 hypervisors may be more useful", no evidence backing this claim.
    • etc..

Very brief, the paper is useful in that it groups together eloquently quite a bit of information, albeit, not in an informative way for the expert, but more so for a person starting their research in a similar domain. Hence, my dilemma; the paper would make a great article in a technical magazine, but not as a conference paper. Perhaps as a poster it would be stimulating and beneficial to the authors and for non-experts interested in the domain (possibly stimulating inter-field synergies etc.).

I have not seen something like this before, but I am not seasoned; hence, why I ask if this is acceptable, or even normal.

Note: The example given is fictional.

1
source | link

Weak Survey as Poster?

My question is related to the fact that at a specific conference, if a submission is rejected then the reviewers may instead recommend that it be presented as a poster session.

Specifically, consider a paper that has no technical contribution. Rather, assume that it is a superficial survey of the main topics included in a scientific domain, i.e. This new domain should take points A, B, C, etc. into consideration, and some of these points may use technologies D, E, F as solutions. Not much literature surveyed and no results by the author included.

Now, it is my understanding that poster sessions are normally works in progress. My questions therefore are:

  • Can weak surveys fit as poster sessions? Is this normal or unheard of?
  • Using the case described in paragraph 2 above, have you witnessed papers of the same quality presented as posters at conferences? Most importantly, is this acceptable behaviour?

Thanks in advance.