View
215
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Publishing – or How to get Publishing – or How to get Out of Grad SchoolOut of Grad School
Henning SchulzrinneDept. of Computer Science
Columbia University(updated Feb. 22, 2005)
Why publish?Why publish? To go to exotic hotels To impress your mother with your name
in print To graduate
external review To get a job
your advisor thinks all his students are above average
To satisfy research contract requirements
How many papers do I need How many papers do I need to graduate?to graduate?
1 Science paper or … 2 Sigcomm papers or … ~5 “real” publications
PublicationsPublications Different kinds of publications Think like a reviewer Finding the right conference Advertising your work Paper types What if my paper is rejected?
Publication typesPublication types Technical reports, including arXiv Workshops Conferences Magazines (“Archival”) Journals Internet Drafts and RFCs
Finding out about Finding out about conferencesconferences CFP = call for papers Finding out about conferences
http://www.cs.ucsb.edu/~almeroth/conf/stats/
TCCC announcement list (subscribe!) Wenyu Jiang’s conference list
Technical ReportsTechnical Reports CS, IBM and BL TR arXiv.org avoids being “scooped” present additional details
(simulation results, proofs, implementation details)
Can be used to advertise on mailing lists – read more often than some conference papers
WorkshopsWorkshops Two kinds:
invited (Dagstuhl) topic-focused (“Internet Measurements”, NANOG)
Smaller, more focused than conferences May not have formal proceedings, just copies of
slides Often, only once or twice, but some for years
(ComSoc) Selectivity varies – from 100% to 10%
Some events are called workshop, but are really conferences (NOSSDAV, IWQoS)
ConferencesConferences Hundreds a year Traditional: ICC, Globecom Semi-traditional: Infocom,
SIGCOMM, ICNP, Sigmetrics, Usenix, SOSP, …
Newer: WWW, NOSSDAV, IWQoS, SAINT, Mobicom, Mobihoc, …
Submission size: 5-12 pages
ConferencesConferences Some have short submissions
(“extended abstract”) and longer accepted papers
Some are effectively the same length (Infocom)
Few have long submissions and shorter final papers
Conference reviewsConference reviews Either technical program committee
(TPC) or TPC + external reviewers Reviews
blind (most IEEE conferences): author doesn’t know reviewer, but reviewer knows author identity
double-blind (ACM): only the chair knows the author identities
Finding the right Finding the right conferenceconference Appropriate conference
layer/topic area style (analysis, system) selectivity location (Australia vs. NY)
Traveling to conferencesTraveling to conferences Many larger conferences have
student travel grants often for authors sometimes for non-authors
(SIGCOMM)
MagazinesMagazines Examples:
IEEE Network Magazine IEEE Communications Magazine IEEE Wireless Communications IEEE Multimedia Magazine
Large circulation topics of broad interest Written for non-specialist (30,000 readers!) Originality not always most important
JournalsJournals Every PhD thesis should result in at
least one journal publication Archival – most libraries have them and
keep them forever Long review cycle Selectivity varies greatly – can be less
selective than some conferences Often, given second chance – “resubmit
with major changes”
JournalsJournals Issued principally by
Societies ACM IEEE
Commercial publishers Springer Verlag Kluwer North Holland
JournalsJournals Examples
IEEE/ACM Transactions on Networking Journal on Selected Areas in Communications Computer Communications Review (CCR) ACM Transactions on Multimedia Computing,Communications and Applications Computer Networks Journal of High Speed Networks Journal of Communications and Networks …
RFCs – Internet Standards RFCs – Internet Standards DocumentsDocuments RFCs are not papers (and vice
versa) Can take a while, particularly for
standards-track documents Start with submitting Internet Drafts
– but most Internet drafts never make it to RFC
Specification vs. description
RFCsRFCs Precision vs. novelty and
performance “How does it work” vs. “how is this
better than existing work” Good way to get impact Good for industrial job interviews
Ways to advertise your Ways to advertise your workwork Technical reports Put link and abstract on web page
(search engines!) Relevant mailing lists (e.g.,
end2end) Send pointer to authors of work that
is closely related arXiv for tech reports
Finding related workFinding related work netbib citeseer Google web pages of well-known network
research groups Digital Library, IEEEXplore
Types of papers - contentTypes of papers - content Measurement
measure performance of real systems test bed or real Internet careful statistics – how representative is
your data? Analysis of existing algorithm
TCP, FDDI, DQDB, RED, … - not some obscure protocol
simulation or analysis bad protocols are good news for authors…
Types of papers, cont’d.Types of papers, cont’d. System description
implement interesting system describe it in sufficient detail what’s new and interesting? prototype, not industrial product
New algorithm or protocol switching, routing, scheduling, … performance evaluation highest risk/reward don’t describe bit fields
Think like a reviewerThink like a reviewer Reviewers are volunteers Reviewers are not English editors
corollary: “if you can’t use a spell checker, why should I trust your graphs and equations?”
Abstract and title have to ensure proper routing of paper (theory vs. systems)
don’t overpromise: “solve QoS problem” vs. “add tweak to DiffServ to better serve soccer videos”
Reviewers get mad if their work is not cited Clearly state what your contribution is (and
state other things in future work)
Think like a reviewer, Think like a reviewer, cont’d.cont’d. Clear motivation – important for non-specialist
reviewers “is the problem important?”
Sufficient detail to evaluate, but not “used gcc 1.2.3 on a SPARC Ultra 10 called snoopy to simulate”
Avoid generic motivations “The rapid advances in foo” cliché!
Repeat main results in introduction and summary corollary: papers are not suspense novels – need to be able
to see scope, motivation and results on first page Very carefully distinguish from prior work
including your own prior work! Avoid overloading one paper (hard!)
paper should tell a story, not be a research catalogue or brain dump
Paper submissionPaper submission Technical report (and RFCs) do no harm Basic rule: cannot submit same material
to two venues simultaneously (including conference and journal)
Don’t explore LPU Conference paper = refined(workshop
paper + detail) Journal paper = refined( conference
papers)
What if a paper is What if a paper is rejected?rejected? Don’t jump off the GWB - it happens to
everyone If not, you’re not submitting to the right
conferences No point complaining if the reviews are
superficial – decisions are effectively final (except for discoveries of plagiarism, etc.)
Publish as tech report immediately (after taking reviews into consideration)