4 ms·
IIRC, expanding with programming languages (PLDI, CGO, ISMM, OOPSLA, etc.) was already discussed when this link was first mentioned on HN. Unfortunately, it see
by sb 15y ago
IIRC, expanding with programming languages (PLDI, CGO, ISMM, OOPSLA, etc.) was already discussed when this link was first mentioned on HN. Unfortunately, it seems to not have been done yet...
Anyways, PLDI has the "Best of PLDI" papers from 1979 to 1999 (http://www.informatik.uni-trier.de/~ley/db/conf/pldi/pldi2004best.html http://www.informatik.uni-trier.de/~ley/db/conf/pldi/pldi200...) and they establish the most important paper 10 after its publication. AFAIK/IIRC OOPSLA/SPLASH does this now as well. I think it's good, but it would also be very interesting to know, whether there is an intersection between the set of "Best Paper" awards and the set of "Most important/impact" awards.
- raphman 15y agoI guess "Lasting Impact" awards are a much better metric than "Best Paper" awards. There is evidence that best paper awards are not actually indicative of a paper's future impact (if defined as the number of citations): Judging quality remains a difficult task for the initial reviewers, but also for the best paper award committee. Despite its honest efforts, the best paper award committee has not selected papers that are cited more often than other papers. In other words, the best paper award committee did not perform better than random chance. From this viewpoint, Desney Tan’s claim that “The Best of CHI awards represent the top one percent of research submissions to CHI” appears too optimistic. http://www.bartneck.de/publications/2009/scientometricAnalysisOfTheCHI/index.html http://www.bartneck.de/publications/2009/scientometricAnalys... My own rant on this topic: http://raphaelwimmer.wordpress.com/2010/11/10/best-paper-demo-poster-awards-considered-harmful/ http://raphaelwimmer.wordpress.com/2010/11/10/best-paper-dem...