A brief rant about conference proceedings

  • Thread starter uby
  • Start date
  • Tags
    Conference
In summary, the conversation discusses the meaninglessness of conference proceedings when evaluating a CV, the need for exclusivity in published data, and the dilemma of presenting work in progress at conferences while preserving the ability to publish in peer-reviewed journals. The frustration of the speaker is also expressed regarding the tradition of conference proceedings and the lack of requirement to submit a paper. It is also mentioned that in some fields, conference proceedings are still important and may even be refereed.
  • #1
uby
176
0
(Apologies if this topic is better suited for a different forum - please move if inappropriate.)

Conference proceedings are meaningless when evaluating a CV, as they are not peer reviewed. However, nearly all well regarded journals require exclusivity for the publishing of data (i.e., that it has not appeared in print in any form, including conference proceedings). As a result, the only work that should appear in a proceedings paper is the work in progress.

Given the fierce competition for funding and the ease with which some groups (particularly those in China) can scoop the results and publish/patent your ideas first, it would be wise to never publicly disclose your work in progress. Thus, the dilemma - how does one attend conferences where you are obligated to present your findings in a manuscript while at the same time preserving your ability to publish novel results in peer-reviewed journals?

Why must conferences continue this antiquated tradition? Wouldn't it make more sense for the conference to be an opportunity to speak about recently published/accepted-for-publication work (i.e., within 6 months of the abstract deadline) that has already been peer reviewed?? This would serve the true purpose of the gathering - dissemination of ideas, building new collaborations, etc. - without the expense of your professional work product (i.e., papers/patents). It would also assure quality of the presented content in a more robust manner than the current standards.

As you can tell, I am quite frustrated by my inability to be a speaking participant at major conferences due to the incompatible restrictions w.r.t. journals and public openness of the audience. I am simply unwilling to give incomplete accounts of my work for the presentation and accompanying paper - it is antithetical to how science should operate.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
To first order, conference proceedings exist to provide a practice ground for students and postdocs to learn how to write papers. Deadlines are usually sufficiently late than a senior person has plenty of time to submit the paper first.
 
  • #3
Indeed, no one really reads conference proceedings. As a consequence in our department we just do not write any conference proceedings anymore. At really rare occasions we write some for invited talks or when the conference proceedings publication could simultaneously be used as a final report of research done for some funding agency. However, I suppose that is a typical "German thing" and does not work that way for funding agencies in other countries.

However, although almost all conferences urge you to write proceedings, few really care in case you do not write anything.
 
  • #4
uby said:
(Apologies if this topic is better suited for a different forum - please move if inappropriate.)

Conference proceedings are meaningless when evaluating a CV, as they are not peer reviewed. However, nearly all well regarded journals require exclusivity for the publishing of data (i.e., that it has not appeared in print in any form, including conference proceedings). As a result, the only work that should appear in a proceedings paper is the work in progress.

Given the fierce competition for funding and the ease with which some groups (particularly those in China) can scoop the results and publish/patent your ideas first, it would be wise to never publicly disclose your work in progress. Thus, the dilemma - how does one attend conferences where you are obligated to present your findings in a manuscript while at the same time preserving your ability to publish novel results in peer-reviewed journals?

Why must conferences continue this antiquated tradition? Wouldn't it make more sense for the conference to be an opportunity to speak about recently published/accepted-for-publication work (i.e., within 6 months of the abstract deadline) that has already been peer reviewed?? This would serve the true purpose of the gathering - dissemination of ideas, building new collaborations, etc. - without the expense of your professional work product (i.e., papers/patents). It would also assure quality of the presented content in a more robust manner than the current standards.

As you can tell, I am quite frustrated by my inability to be a speaking participant at major conferences due to the incompatible restrictions w.r.t. journals and public openness of the audience. I am simply unwilling to give incomplete accounts of my work for the presentation and accompanying paper - it is antithetical to how science should operate.

I'm puzzled. The conference that I attend makes NO REQUIREMENT that one submits a paper to the proceedings. In other words, I'm not obligated to submit anything to the proceedings. Are the conferences you attend REQUIRE such a thing? How can they enforce it? After all, the conference is over and all you have to do is not submit anything. They can't force you to write something, can they?

Cthugha said:
Indeed, no one really reads conference proceedings. As a consequence in our department we just do not write any conference proceedings anymore. At really rare occasions we write some for invited talks or when the conference proceedings publication could simultaneously be used as a final report of research done for some funding agency. However, I suppose that is a typical "German thing" and does not work that way for funding agencies in other countries.

However, although almost all conferences urge you to write proceedings, few really care in case you do not write anything.

It isn't true that no one reads conference proceedings. Until recently, the accelerator physics field relies A LOT on conference proceedings from various PACs , LINACs conferences, and AAC (Advanced Accelerator Concepts) workshops. In fact, the accelerator community has created a JACoW page where conference proceedings from this various conferences are centralized. In fact, these are the quickest and most up-to-date means of getting information from various parts of the community.

Furthermore, it isn't true that all conference proceedings are not refereed. I've been to several in which I had to referee conference proceedings.

Zz.
 
  • #5
ZapperZ said:
It isn't true that no one reads conference proceedings. Until recently, the accelerator physics field relies A LOT on conference proceedings from various PACs , LINACs conferences, and AAC (Advanced Accelerator Concepts) workshops. In fact, the accelerator community has created a JACoW page where conference proceedings from this various conferences are centralized. In fact, these are the quickest and most up-to-date means of getting information from various parts of the community.

Ok, my personal field of experience is in the range of semiconductor physics and a bit of optics. In most subfields within these disciplines the methods of getting very recent research have once been conference proceedings, but most moved on to using ArXiv preprints for rapid distribution of results. Especially as conference proceedings are not always open access and few institutes are interested in paying for access to these proceedings.

Of course I cannot speak for other branches of physics.


ZapperZ said:
Furthermore, it isn't true that all conference proceedings are not refereed. I've been to several in which I had to referee conference proceedings.

Definitely true, I also had to referee proceedings a few times. But from my experience these are not refereed as rigorously as common journal publications are. However, that might also differ from field to field.
 
  • #6
ZapperZ said:
I'm puzzled. The conference that I attend makes NO REQUIREMENT that one submits a paper to the proceedings. In other words, I'm not obligated to submit anything to the proceedings. Are the conferences you attend REQUIRE such a thing? How can they enforce it? After all, the conference is over and all you have to do is not submit anything. They can't force you to write something, can they?
Zz.

Most conferences in my field have proceedings given at the conference. The manuscript must be submitted and accepted well in advance of the presentation, usually a month or so after abstract acceptance. For those that do proceedings after the meeting, papers presented are obligated to goto the conference venue unless given written permission otherwise.
 
  • #7
The ONE clear evidence that we can gather so far is that there is a WIDE variety of conferences for a WIDE variety of physics fields.

This makes generalization of ANY kind to be impossible. So one simply cannot make any claims about conference proceedings that would be valid somewhere else. And that is what I tried to address here and why the original post is not an accurate reflection of any and all proceedings.

Zz.
 

FAQ: A brief rant about conference proceedings

1. What is a conference proceeding?

A conference proceeding is a collection of papers or abstracts presented at a conference or symposium. It serves as a record of the research and discussions that occurred during the event.

2. Why are conference proceedings important?

Conference proceedings are important because they allow researchers to share their work with a wider audience and receive feedback from their peers. They also serve as a way to document and preserve scientific progress and discoveries.

3. How are conference proceedings different from journals?

Conference proceedings and journals are both platforms for presenting and publishing research. However, conference proceedings usually contain shorter and less detailed papers that have not yet undergone the rigorous peer-review process required for publication in a journal.

4. Are conference proceedings considered to be valid sources of information?

Yes, conference proceedings are considered to be valid sources of information. However, it is important to note that the information presented in conference proceedings is not as thoroughly vetted as that in peer-reviewed journals, so it should be used with caution and in conjunction with other sources.

5. Can conference proceedings be cited in academic papers?

Yes, conference proceedings can be cited in academic papers. However, you should always check with the specific guidelines of the journal or institution you are submitting to, as some may have restrictions on citing conference proceedings.

Similar threads

Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
4
Views
6K
Replies
7
Views
1K
Replies
10
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
5K
Replies
11
Views
2K
Back
Top