1

Here is the situation; I made an article that got published in a Computer Science conference; the final decision was that it was considered a borderline paper. After a while I got an email from the organizers of that conference, letting the authors know that there would be the chance to resubmit our articles to a journal, but that the work should contain at least 30% more contribution than the original paper. Long story short, I worked through all the reviewers comments and added more information on my original article.

Actually I am a little bit afraid if my article would make it through the journal, but because I worked hard on doing the asked changes I would not like to leave it like that.

For that reason, I was wondering that in case of a rejection, Could I submit my expanded work to another conference; or should I just leave it like that? I am afraid that maybe the reviewers from another conference could see it like a case of self-plagiarized, even though I am citing my original article.

What to do in this situation? Should I paraphrase all the article again before submitting it with the new material? or should just let it be?

  • It sounds like you are asking two distinct questions. 1. Should you submit the updated conference paper for publication? 2. Can you submit the updated manuscript to a second conference? – Jeromy Anglim Mar 12 '15 at 6:12
3

When in doubt talk to your adviser.

It is common in the Computer Science that the delta between conference and journal papers is 30%. That is not updated text only, but 30% of new substantial material, such as new experiments etc.

When submitting paper to a conference, there isn't a 30% rule. Your new paper needs to have a stand-alone novel contribution.

The reason is that CS adopted an iterative publication style workshop -> conference -> journal. So if your extended paper does not get accepted to a journal, you can attempt another journal, but not another conference.

  • 1
    It should be noted that in practice, the 30% new material often are not new "scientific" contributions, but rather better explanations of what was already presented on the conference. For example, a journal paper might add a more complete list of commands supported by whatever was presented where there was only an excerpt before, or a formal listing of an algorithm whose functional basics were only textually outlined before. At least that's my impression from journal papers I have come across. – O. R. Mapper Mar 12 '15 at 8:54
  • @O.R.Mapper ... true, but this approach work may or may not work depending on how strict the reviewers and handling editor of the journal take the XX% rule. – xLeitix Mar 12 '15 at 10:22
1

For that reason, I was wondering that in case of a rejection, Could I submit my expanded work to another conference; or should I just leave it like that? I am afraid that maybe the reviewers from another conference could see it like a case of self-plagiarized, even though I am citing my original article.

Submitting a conference paper that is only 30% off of another conference paper is not very likely to succeed. It is likely not going to be considered self-plagiarism (at least not if you didn't copy-and-paste large parts of your old paper, just described similar ideas in a new way), but the reviewers are likely going to criticise that the innovation over existing research (often called the "delta") just isn't large enough.

However, you are free to resubmit to a different journal if this one rejects your paper. Getting "invited to submit an extension" gives you sort of a starting advantage, but you can still submit your revised manuscript to any other journal. Just note that some journals require a larger update than 30%, so you should check that you are in compliance with the journal's rules prior to submission.

1

Although your paper is now an expanded version, it would most likely have the same or very similar findings as that of the version you presented at the conference. Thus, if you present the expanded version at another conference, you'll most likely be repeating most of the ideas you presented at the previous conference. Thus, your paper will lack novelty, and will not be a success.

In case your paper gets rejected, a far better option would be to submit it to another journal. Make sure you go through the peer review comments even if your paper is rejected, and try to incorporate the changes suggested. That way, your manuscript will be further improved and will stand a better chance of acceptance when you submit it to another journal.

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

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