No results.


GD Star Rating

One of the most important emerging fields within information retrieval is that of complaining about SIGIR. It is a field of work with a very wide participation. Researchers complain about the upcoming deadline in January; reviewers complain about their reviewing load and the quality of submissions during February; the senior program committee complains about reviewers, the review process, the acceptance criteria, and each other throughout March; accepted and rejected authors alike complain about the quality of reviews; conference attendees complain about the quality of the accepted pages; all of these complaints are rehearsed at the conference business meeting; and bloggers complain about all the complaining.

Alongside the cycle of impassioned disaffection with SIGIR is a parallel industry in recycling rejected SIGIR papers. Traditionally, these were bounced to CIKM in June, and CIKM rejects back to SIGIR the following January. As SIGIR submission numbers climb, though, and the acceptance rate ebbs away, other publication venues are increasingly being fertilized with SIGIR’s nutritious run-off. There is even now an online journal devoted to SIGIR rejects, launched two days ago by the market-savvy Ian Soboroff, as this year’s rejection slips were being emailed out.

On an unrelated topic, the submission deadline for EVIA 2010 (of which I am co-chair) is this coming Wednesday, March 31st. We happen to be using the same paper format as SIGIR. If anyone has work on information retrieval evaluation they’re looking for a venue for, we’d be very happy to consider it for publication at EVIA.


Leave a Reply




You can use these HTML tags

<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>