To understand the motivation for the abstract and better pictureI think it's a great idea to try things like this. I hope it will work though. One of the reasons that papers often get written badly for STOC/FOCS is because there's an incentive to obfuscate and make things look rather technical. Whether the post-deadline calm will allow people to see beyond the chest-thumping will decide whether the 2-pages are useful.
its contents, think about how often the 20 minute presentation at
STOC/FOCS provides a better insight into the research than the
paper. While preparing the talk, the authors can step back and
try to explain something interesting about their work - either the
core of their proof, or a special case of their theorem, or the
new conceptual framework that they introduce. The one week
period after the mad rush to the STOC/FOCS deadline would
provide a chance to reflect, and additionally there would be an
incentive for the authors (just as in the conference presentations),
to simplify.
Ruminations on computational geometry, algorithms, theoretical computer science and life
Friday, March 27, 2009
The FOCS submission experiment
Via Muthu, an explanation by Umesh Vazirani of the rationale for the new 'submmary after the deadline' experiment at TOCS. A key paragraph:
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
The post-deadline calm consisting of the MADALGO workshop deadline, and then ESA?
ReplyDelete