Showing posts with label ICS. Show all posts
Showing posts with label ICS. Show all posts
Thursday, May 20, 2010
ICS 2011
Bernard highlights the 2nd incarnation of ICS, to be held again in Beijing between Jan 7-9, 2011.
What's newsworthy is the shifted submission deadline. Last year, the ICS submit-accept cycle was highly compressed, to make sure it didn't clash with either SODA or STOC. This year, it's in direct conflict with SODA (submission deadline Aug 2), which should make things interesting for the SODA submission levels.
Since the conference is still in some flux (I don't know where it will be next year), it's probably too soon to comment on the timing/deadlines, but I wonder whether it will continue to be a good idea to have SODA and ICS be in direct conflict.
What's newsworthy is the shifted submission deadline. Last year, the ICS submit-accept cycle was highly compressed, to make sure it didn't clash with either SODA or STOC. This year, it's in direct conflict with SODA (submission deadline Aug 2), which should make things interesting for the SODA submission levels.
Since the conference is still in some flux (I don't know where it will be next year), it's probably too soon to comment on the timing/deadlines, but I wonder whether it will continue to be a good idea to have SODA and ICS be in direct conflict.
Loading Image
Click anywhere to cancel
Image is Unavailable
Labels:
conferences,
ICS,
soda
Monday, November 02, 2009
Innovation in Computer Science
As the polylogblogdogslogglog blog points out, the ICS results are out. 39 papers were accepted in all - at some point I knew the number of submissions, but I've forgotten since.
The ICS folks didn't make life easy for themselves by explicitly stating that they wanted "conceptual contributions". But looking over the list of papers, a few things come to mind:
Update: Shiva Kintali has PDFs for the accepted papers.
The ICS folks didn't make life easy for themselves by explicitly stating that they wanted "conceptual contributions". But looking over the list of papers, a few things come to mind:
- It's a great list of papers. Nothing to complain about really, and any of these could have been a credible paper at FOCS/STOC
- The Arora et al paper on designing derivatives using NP-hard problems has already received so much chatter, one might argue that the conference mandate has already been satisfied. Similarly for the quantum money followup.
- Even if the whole 'conceptual contributions' thing doesn't pan out, I see no harm in having a third conference inserted between FOCS and STOC - the more the merrier.
- I guess innovation = "game theory + crypto + quantum + misc" :)
Update: Shiva Kintali has PDFs for the accepted papers.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)