2 ms·
Submitting a paper to a conference for it to be published 11 months later is not going to work - the paper will be hopelessly obsolete by then. A better soluti
by p1esk 7y ago
Submitting a paper to a conference for it to be published 11 months later is not going to work - the paper will be hopelessly obsolete by then.
A better solution imo is to improve openreview.net process somehow, so that I'm motivated to go there, find papers relevant to my research (ideally get notified when such papers are posted for review), and leave a review (and perhaps vote on other reviews just like we do here on HN, or do something else to influence the acceptance decision). Obviously there should be methods to prevent abuse: moderators, reputations of reviewers, restricting reviewers to those with specific publications (e.g. based on keywords), etc. Btw, code reproducibility could be used to give some weight in such public review process.
- elcomet 7y agoThis is ok if you can upload preprints on arxiv or equivalent. The obsolescence of papers already happens now, when a conference is 6 months after the submission, and the preprints system works fine.
- scott_s 7y ago> Submitting a paper to a conference for it to be published 11 months later is not going to work - the paper will be hopelessly obsolete by then. That's not how the VLDB process works. What they did was establish a PVLDB journal which has a monthly deadline, and it accepts 5-12 papers a month. The papers are public on the website a few months after acceptance. (See: https://vldb.org/pvldb/vol12.html https://vldb.org/pvldb/vol12.html) The VLDB conference is then all of the papers that appeared in PVLDB in the past year. I would be in favor of exploring your model as well, but I also see the hybrid model developed by VLDB as superior to the standard conference submission and review process.