4 ms·
The minimum number should be 0. In most places, it is. That said, I think most CS PhDs -- and definitely most strong CD PhDs -- will have a few publications in
by neilc 14y ago
The minimum number should be 0.
In most places, it is. That said, I think most CS PhDs -- and definitely most strong CD PhDs -- will have a few publications in top conferences. This has several benefits:
(1) communicating your results -- few people read entire theses.
(2) getting feedback from the community, both in the form of PC reviews and feedback from the conference attendees.
(3) as a way to checkpoint your work on individual sub-projects, and to act as a forcing function.
Trying to "require" independent publications as part of a PhD seems silly, but having publications is definitely a good thing IMHO.
- guylhem 14y agoI fully agree with the benefits of communicating one's result, if only for feedback and getting independent verification or validation - but a paper is only a given way to reach this goal. If your area of research is obscure or quickly evolving, a journal might not be the best place to share your results, while giving a presentation at relevant conferences, where people working on similar topics will get exposed to your result, is better. But even this is secondary. I loved doing research, but I was even more interested in the end result - having something working and useful. Not publishing might have damaged my "profile" in several places where the amount of dead trees is the only thing that matters, but it's all a matter of priorities - and I'm not sure I'd have been happy to work in a place where the end result is only an afterthought. Maybe that's why I'm reading HN :-)
- scott_s 14y agoI think it's worth noting that in the more systems side of CS, researchers focus on publishing in conferences. Conferences have their own sets of problems, but the turn-around time is much better than that of journals.