[Sc_coordination] Re: Answer by Ilaria and Francesco to your feedback

OK eM On 07/11/2023 08:45, Mieke Massink wrote: > Dear SC members, > > Below please find the reply by Ilaria and Francesco on your suggestions. > They have also slightly changed the composition of the PC to obtain a > better gender balance and representativity from different countries. I'm > attaching the new list to this email. > > We really have to start inviting the PC and get the CfP out soon. So a > very quick reply is much appreciated (just "OK" if you wish is fine, > unless you see a real problem or typo). > > Many thanks and best regards, > >    Mieke > > On 02/11/23 09:49, Francesco Tiezzi wrote: >> Dear Mieke, >> thank you for your detailed feedbacks. We reply below to the various >> points. >> >> Il giorno gio 2 nov 2023 alle ore 09:49 Mieke Massink >> <mieke.massink(a)isti.cnr.it> ha scritto: >> >> Dear Ilaria and Francesco, >> >> Last Monday I forwarded your proposal for the PC and draft CfP to >> the Steering Commission. Below please find the first set of >> suggestions. More people may still follow-up on my email, but I >> wanted to share the feedback received so far already with you in >> order to speed-up the preparations for the conference. >> >> I’m happy to inform you that almost all members that responded so >> far agree with most of the proposal and with the proposed members >> for the PC. On the latter there was a slight concern about the >> gender balance. (It was remarked that the proposed PC has 11/23 >> female-to-male ratio, which is kind of underwhelming. True, this >> is very close to the ratio we had in 2020 (9/18) but last year it >> was already 12/17, which is much better.) The SC expresses their >> gratitude for you hard work. >> >> We agree with this comment and we have revised the list of PC members >> accordingly (see the attached Excel file). Please, let us know your >> opinion about the modified PC (we tried to improve gender balance and >> reduce the number of people from Italian institutions). >> >> There have also been a few suggestions for improvement and some >> minor suggestions (see below). >> >> - Concerning the requirements for artefact submissions and EAPLS >> badging. The information on this procedure is currently missing >> but should be inserted also in the first version of the CfP. The >> guidelines document that you received some time ago provides clear >> indications on how to do this. These guidelines have been >> discussed and agreed upon by the SC. In particular, at the end of >> the guidelines document you find some helpful definitions and >> principles concerning artefacts badging. In particular: >> >> 1) Following ACM’s definition, an artifact is “[a] digital object >> that was either created by the authors to be used as part of the >> study or generated by the experiment itself. For example, >> artifacts can be software systems, scripts used to run >> experiments, input datasets, raw data collected in the experiment, >> or scripts used to analyze results. 
 >> 2) COORDINATION accepts regular papers and tool papers. For both >> kinds of papers AE is voluntary. To improve and reward >> reproducibility and to give more visibility and credit to the >> effort of tool developers in our community, authors of accepted >> (regular and tool, short and long) papers will be invited to >> submit publicly available (using permanent repositories such as >> Software Heritage, Zenodo, etc.) artifacts associated with their >> paper for evaluation, and based on the result of the evaluation >> they may be awarded one or more badges. See EAPLS Artifact Badges >> for details. Artifact submission is optional and the result of the >> artifact evaluation will not alter the paper’s acceptance decision >> but may impact the decision on best papers. Detailed guidelines >> for the preparation and submission of the artifacts will be made >> available. >> >> The rules for artefact submission and badging should be clearly >> mentioned in the CfP and on the web-site of Coordination. >> >> We will improve the CfP accordingly. Anyway, we would like to discuss >> this matter also with the AE Chair. Therefore, we are going to first >> invite Rumyana as AE Chair. >> >> >> Some minor suggestions: >> >> - Some found the use of the term “long” sounds strange. Most >> conferences just call them “regular papers”; calling them “long” >> may be confusing. In fact, the length of the “long” paper is from >> 7-15 pages. So “regular” might be a better term. >> >> Ok. >> >> Furthermore, it was suggested to put tool papers as the last in >> the order as they have a longer description and are considered >> orthogonal to the other categories. >> >> Ok. >> >> Someone suggested to be also a bit more tolerant on the maximal >> length of a paper and, say accept a paper that is 10% longer if >> this is beneficial for the clarity of the paper. One could make >> this explicit in the CfP and require authors to inform the PC >> Chairs about such a case. >> >> We are a little puzzled about this suggestion. Instead, we propose to >> directly and explicitly increase for everybody the page limit to 17 >> pages for regular papers. What do you think? >> >> >> - Furthermore, maybe it is possible to improve the description of >> tool papers as currently much content is between parentheses. >> >> Ok. >> >> - There was some concern about requiring a 10 minutes video in >> addition to an artefact would not ask too much of the authors. As >> far as I remember, the video in the past was required only for >> short tool papers. >> >> We have replaced "must" by "may" for this requirement. Anyway, the >> last year the video was required for both long and short tool papers. >> >> >> - the link to the website is currently dangling. This should be >> fixed before it is distributed. >> >> Sure, we will ask Jorge. >> >> Best regards, >> Francesco & Ilaria > > -- > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Dr. Mieke Massink Ph.D. - Senior Researcher > > FM&&T Group (http://fmt.isti.cnr.it) > > C.N.R. - Area della Ricerca di Pisa - Ist. ISTI > > Via G. Moruzzi, 1 - I56124 Pisa, Italy > > Tel: +39 050 3152981http://www1.isti.cnr.it/~Massink/ > > Fax: +39 050 3152040 E-mail:Mieke.Massink@isti.cnr.it > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > “Half of humanity is in the danger zone, from floods, droughts, extreme > storms and wildfires. No nation is immune. Yet we continue to feed our > fossil fuel addiction. > > We have a choice. Collective action or collective suicide. It is in our > hands.” > > António Guterres, UN Secretary General, July 2022, at the Petersberg > Climate Dialogue, Berlin > > > -- > Sc_coordination mailing list > sc_coordination(a)isti.cnr.it > https://mailman.isti.cnr.it/postorius/lists/sc_coordination.isti.cnr.it/