6

Assume the hiring committee (Computer science) are reviewing the CVs of two Ph.D. graduate's with almost equal skills/expertise.

Regarding their best publications, one has 1-2 short papers (e.g. 6 pages) in A* conferences (top-tier) whereas the other one has 1-2 full papers in B* conferences (second-tier) in comparison, and both of them have an equal amount of other publications in lower ranked venues and journals.

Then which one can have better chances in getting hired as a post-doc researcher? Consider

closed as primarily opinion-based by Buffy, scaaahu, user3209815, Richard Erickson, Scientist Aug 22 '18 at 17:04

Many good questions generate some degree of opinion based on expert experience, but answers to this question will tend to be almost entirely based on opinions, rather than facts, references, or specific expertise. If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.

  • 1
    The question seems to be asking for pure opinion. I've voted to close on that basis. The disparity of answers seems to verify this. – Buffy Aug 22 '18 at 13:38
  • 3
    Man, there are so many different grades of conferences in your field that "A+" and "B+" make sense as grades? In my area, we just have "the best conferences", "the second-tier conferences" and "other conferences". – David Richerby Aug 22 '18 at 15:07
  • 1
    I'm not an academics (at least yet), but is even the conferences has some sort of grade of qualities ? If that is the case, it is just openly dumb. – onurcanbektas Aug 22 '18 at 15:48
  • 1
    @onurcanbektas (T)CS is somewhat different from many other fields. From what I hear: getting a paper into one of the prestigious TCS conferences is equivalent to me getting a mathematics paper into one of the top journals (by which I mean Duke, Annals, ...) – Yemon Choi Aug 23 '18 at 14:19
  • 1
    @Buffy: Well, that's your pure opinion. I already got enough valuable responses and comments to have a good idea of how it looks in the eyes of academic people. But i'm sure with that attitude we can put half of the questions of this site on hold since many things in academia happen based on the opinions of people involved in, and not on the account of solid regulations. ;) – Babak Aug 23 '18 at 20:11
9

A short paper at an A+ conference is better on your CV than a full paper at a B+ conference, because readers will pay attention to venues and will most likely ignore paper lengths (even if you include them -- which you probably won't, because they take up room).

But, it seems like you're trying to decide upon a venue on the basis of only the immediate impact on your CV, you should take a broader, longer-term perspective.


Backstory: The OP's paper was originally ten pages and it has been accepted at the A+ conference on the condition that it is reduced to six pages.

  • 4
    This is in my experience patently wrong. – xLeitix Aug 22 '18 at 9:40
  • 6
    It's patently correct in mine. – user2768 Aug 22 '18 at 9:54
  • In my experience, short papers on your CV don't mean much regardless of conference. – Austin Henley Aug 22 '18 at 13:23
  • @AustinHenley What about when the conference doesn't distinguish between a regular paper and a short paper? – user2768 Aug 22 '18 at 14:33
  • @user2768 Then it doesn't apply since the OP is asking about a short paper vs full paper. – Austin Henley Aug 22 '18 at 14:35
5

I agree with @user2768, short paper in A+ conference is better than full paper in B+ conference in general.

  • While it is true that if you compare two papers, the long version in B+ conference may look better. In a CV, a lot of A+ papers will collectively give a much better impression.
  • It shows that you aim high.
  • You should include the number of pages in your CV, but nobody will have time to look at a list, then do the calculation, oh page 113 - 118, oh that's a 6-page paper. DBLP doesn't show number of page.
  • You can re-submit the full paper to a journal. Many top journals in CS are very short, e.g. TSE only allows 12 pages including references (and $200 for each additional page)
4

As I wrote in an answer to your previous question, I think a short paper is fairly useless in terms of CV building, so a B+ conference would presumably be more valuable. I don't know your concrete examples, so it's hard for me to tell how these "B+" conferences would appeal to a grading or hiring committee.

Also, is it necessary to emphasize in the CV whether the papers were accepted as a full or short version?

In my opinion it is, if you like being taken seriously. I am currently in a hiring committee, and I see many candidates passively or actively hiding the fact that some of their papers have been in side or short paper tracks rather than at the main conference. This never works, because I will (for all good candidates) actively seek out their best papers to look at them (not necessarily to check if they are full papers, more because I want to see what kind of research the candidate does). If I then find that what I thought was their strongest paper is actually some short paper, my opinion of the candidate deteriorates quickly.

In my experience having your lesser works blend in with your most important papers actually works against you - you presumably have a limited number of papers that you actually want people to check to get an impression of you as a researcher, and having your weak work mingle with your best work is detrimental to this goal. Nowadays I actively highly the <10 best works in my CV, to make sure an evaluator understands which papers I consider to be the best representation of the work I want to do.

  • The OP's paper was originally ten pages and it has been accepted at the A+ conference on the condition that it is reduced to six pages. With this in mind, is publication of the original ten page manuscript at a B+ conference actually more valuable? – user2768 Aug 22 '18 at 10:01
  • 3
    Publishing is not rejection. – user2768 Aug 22 '18 at 10:04
  • 3
    @user2768 In smaller conferences that I am involved in, basically all rejected papers get the opportunity to be published as short. It gets more people registered for the conference since they must present and it doesn't hurt the conference's acceptance rate. – Austin Henley Aug 22 '18 at 14:17
  • 1
    @AustinHenley I have seen exactly the same at top software engineering conferences. A good chunk of poster / short papers are actually rejected full papers that got rejected at the research track and got "invited" to publish a reduced version as short paper or poster. OP's original questions sounds exactly like this case, and I can assure you that people will not see these as equivalent in quality to the full papers. – xLeitix Aug 22 '18 at 15:06
  • 1
    "Nowadays I actively highly the" I think you meant "highlight" – msouth Aug 22 '18 at 16:12

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.