6

I'm working on research which I plan to finish in the next 2-3 months. I want to present some preliminary results as a short paper at the conference. The deadline for the short papers submission is the beginning of September, and the conference is scheduled for mid-March 2025 (there is 6 months gap).

My question is, can I submit a full research paper to some journal (expanding on the results from the conference paper) before the conference (and after acceptance of the short paper)? E.g. my research should be done by November, and I would not like to just wait with ready finished paper until March...

I plan to make my conference short paper preprint available on Arxiv.

3 Answers 3

4

Short answer: yes, this is fine. It would be absurd and pointless to make you wait until after the conference to submit the journal version of the paper. Even waiting until after you get the decision about the initial paper’s acceptance to the conference has no logical purpose that I can think of, and is unnecessary IMO.

(Of course, the journal version of the paper should cite the conference paper, and maybe discuss in what ways it’s expanding on it.)

Detailed answer: in computer science, some areas of math, and possibly other disciplines, it’s very common for authors to submit a preliminary, typically short version of a work to a conference and later prepare a longer version to submit to a journal. This is seen as completely normal and acceptable. The rationale behind this is that the initial short version is a quick way to disseminate exciting new research, while perhaps not communicating the work in as much detail (or in some cases as accurately) as the slower-to-prepare version; whereas the long version is supposed to conform to higher standards of detail and accuracy, and is peer reviewed according to the more thorough and strict standards of academic journals - so that represents the “ultimate”, more authoritative, version of the work.

What you are proposing to do is completely in keeping with this philosophy and the norms around this sort of dual publication pipeline. In fact, I would say that you are maybe being overly cautious in suggesting to wait until your conference paper is accepted before submitting the journal version. I don’t see any reason why you would need to wait at all - you can submit the longer version as soon as it is ready.

The only type of related behavior that I would find problematic is submitting the journal version before the conference version. As the journal version is supposed to supersede and obviate the need for the conference version, personally I see this as a type of gaming the system (and akin to a kind of double-dipping or self-plagiarism), at least given the norms prevalent in the specific fields I am working on. Actually I was involved for a few years with the program committee of a large math conference, and encountered a situation where authors submitted a conference version of a paper that has already been submitted and accepted to a journal. I was not involved with the final decision-making on this paper, and I vaguely recall that the people in charge did decide to accept it to the conference (and they had some reasoning why they thought that made sense, which I thought had some validity but was not very compelling). I expressed concern at the time that the paper shouldn’t be accepted, and I know I wasn’t the only one holding that opinion.

6
  • Thank you very much! So, a journal paper with the sentence like the following solves the issue: "this work is an extension of the short paper \cite{arxiv_version} submitted to (or accepted by, depending on the timing) the "Name of the Conference"?
    – Vukasin
    Commented Jul 28 at 10:32
  • 1
    @Vukasin yep, that should be fine. Here is an example of a recent paper of mine that includes such a statement, and a few additional sentences explaining in what way the long paper extends the short one. You may want to provide such details as well if they provides additional useful context.
    – Dan Romik
    Commented Jul 28 at 14:40
  • In my area, having the conference and the journal version submitted in parallel, before the conference version is accepted, would probably be seen as an illegitimate form of double submission by most. After all, the conference version is usually fully included in the journal paper and is then in two review processes at the same time. Commented Jul 29 at 8:00
  • @lighthousekeeper why is it OK for two papers one of which is fully included in the other to be in review (and eventually published) not at the same time, but it’s not OK for them to be in review at the same time? I don’t see the difference. The fact that it’s OK for both to be published is logically a kind of double-dipping even if the submissions are in series rather than in parallel. (The usual justification I have heard for why this is okay is that conferences aren’t really “peer reviewed” in the same way that journals are peer reviewed. That logic still holds for parallel submissions.)
    – Dan Romik
    Commented Jul 29 at 14:40
  • For the same reason why double submissions are generally not allowed in the first place: Having the same material reviewed in parallel by different sets of reviewers is an unethical waste of reviewer time, as the reviewers give feedback based on the submitted version, which might still be far from publishable. In the usual sequential model, the extended journal version incorporates the changes that were made to the conference paper in response to the reviewer comments from the conference. Commented Jul 29 at 20:21
2

With a couple of caveats this should be fine. The first is whether the journal will want the copyright before the conference and what restrictions they might impose. Seems unlikely, but possible. But either the conference or the journal might have issues with begin "second", depending on their requirements for novelty.

But, I don't see those caveats as likely in this case, as long as you are honest with both parties. It is unlikely that your journal paper would be published prior to the conference and you will probably hold copyright through the process. Note that submitting a paper is not the same as publishing it and the time delays are usually fairly long.

And make sure that the journal is happy with preprints. Many (most?) are these days, but you need to be sure.

-3

You may want to be careful about this matter. Duplicate publications will hurt your reputation in the long run. Quality is more important than quantity.

4
  • It’s described as an extension, however, not a duplicate.
    – Buffy
    Commented Jul 27 at 21:22
  • Think about the audience. It is better for them to read the whole story as one big piece, instead of two broken components.
    – scientist
    Commented Jul 27 at 21:26
  • 4
    Neither is that how it is described.
    – Buffy
    Commented Jul 27 at 21:51
  • It probably depends on the research area.
    – scientist
    Commented Jul 30 at 22:11

You must log in to answer this question.

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