1

I'm about to send a paper about performance optimization in the field of Cloud computing. My target conference has a limit of 10-pages for the main section with unlimited pages for appendixes/references. My question is whether it's a good idea to move small details of my evaluation results to the Appendixes (to save some pages for other stuff), or it's better to somehow fit them in the main section?

My current plan is to keep key important evaluation results in the main section (maybe only 1 or 2 graphs) and move every other messy stuff to the appendix, including comparison graphs, evaluation parameters, extracted latency/throughput data, and most importantly, details of scenarios that I considered for the evaluation.

Is this a good idea?

P.S: My adviser (who is far more experienced) is against this idea. He says: "you should only put things into Appendixes that if a reader misses them, they can still exactly understand what you did in your paper (e.g., proofs of theorems). Evaluation results are not in this category, and they need to be put in the main section." Of course, I agree with this argument, but my question is specifically about whether small details of evaluation experiments fit in this category or not.

9
  • 1
    Putting some nonessential details into the appendix is fair. The scenarios you considered are surely not nonessential. Dec 25, 2020 at 16:09
  • @lighthousekeeper Alright. For scenarios, I'll keep explanation of scenarios in the main part. What about the details of the evaluation results? I have 3-4 pages of results (numbers/charts/graphs) for ~200 different scenarios that I tested to make sure my model is accurate. Dec 25, 2020 at 16:23
  • 1
    If it's not possible to put all these details in the paper, you might have to do some compromises. Include the details that are most important for your story: anything that is suitable for giving an "overview", and interesting individual cases. Put everything else into the appendix. Dec 26, 2020 at 13:06
  • @lighthousekeeper Makes a lot sense. Thanks for your advice, I'll appreciate it if you elaborate a bit more as an answer. Dec 27, 2020 at 6:55
  • 1
    My general strategy is to have as many details in the paper as possible. Usually it's not possible to have all the details in the paper, due to page limits. The details that didn't make the cut then go to the appendix. Dec 29, 2020 at 20:18

2 Answers 2

1

I think your advisor gives good advice.

But if you are sole author, you can probably write it as you like and wait for the response of reviewers of the conference papers. But if you are too far off the "standard" you risk a quick reject rather than a suggestion to change it.

If you are only a co-author you need to negotiate it, of cours.e

2
  • Do you think it's a terribly bad idea to put evaluation results in the appendix? As I said to Nicole, I have 3-4 pages of evaluation results, and I think putting all of them in the main section just makes my paper so unnecessarily messy! Dec 25, 2020 at 15:52
  • 1
    Like any reviewer I'd need to see what you have actually written. But perhaps you really need to rethink the organization of your results. You might need to do that even if you put them in the appendix.
    – Buffy
    Dec 25, 2020 at 15:58
-1

Between the two of you, I'd go with whoever has more experience.

9
  • 1
    An ability to negotiate and resolve issues is super important skill for anyone who wants to succeed and get stuff done. A lot of people think about that as, what do I want. But it's more important to identify what the person you're negotiating with wants and understand their reasons. In a partnership like the one you're in, you need to size up that you can't win this argument because it really is guided by experience. Give in gracefully and move on to the next item. Dec 25, 2020 at 16:01
  • Thanks for your insightful advice. I 100% agree with you and I think it's vital for junior researchers to learn how to effectively negotiate/communicate with all parties in a project (including their supervisor). I believe my case is a bit different though, as I'm currently completely on my own. Dec 25, 2020 at 16:21
  • 1
    @linker You're not completely on your own. You have a supervisor. I don't understand why you think you're in some different special case where Nicole Hamilton's advice doesn't apply.
    – Bryan Krause
    Dec 25, 2020 at 22:44
  • 1
    @linker Yes I believe there are irresponsible supervisors, but this isn't an issue raised in your question here. Your question is about a specific manuscript design choice. Your supervisor isn't absent on this topic - in fact they have already weighed in with an opinion. Maybe it's not the kind of advice you are looking for but it seems like they are responding.
    – Bryan Krause
    Dec 26, 2020 at 8:18
  • @BryanKrause Exactly! the question is specifically about whether putting evaluation results in the appendix (considering the aforementioned criteria) is a good practice or not. Even though the topic is subjective in nature, I believe there should be some form of guidelines/best practices somewhere... Dec 26, 2020 at 16:36

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .