Context: I'm an early PhD student (physics) applying for a talk at a conference (APS). I have never been to a conference before. My topic does not fit neatly into any of the session titles. There are a few focus sessions and a few standard sessions that are more specific, and only borderline relevant (if at all, some do not have detailed descriptions, so I could be misjudging), and one standard session which is very broad and definitely includes my topic in its scope. For my abstract submission, I need to choose one of the sessions to submit to.
- Have my abstract selected. I want to have the practice of giving a talk at a large conference.
- Get feedback/questions on my work. Ideally this would be from someone who knows about my topic, is familiar with the literature etc. However, I would also welcome feedback on my general theoretical framework, which is general enough that a large fraction of theorists in the field will be able to understand after a decent introduction to the particular system that my work looks at.
- How do I pick a session which maximizes the chance of achieving Goal 2. while minimizing the damage to Goal 1.? I.e. if my talk falls outside of the scope of the session I applied for (but not the conference), will it increase my chance of being rejected? Or will my submission just be altered by conference organizers and moved to a different session?
- Am I more likely to be accepted at a standard session than focus session?
- Does APS allow for indication of interest in more than one session?