An Ontological Approach for the Quality Assessment of Computer Science Conferences

Souto, Maria Aparecida M.; Warpechowski, Mariúsa; Oliveira, José Palazzo M. de

doi:10.1007/978-3-540-76292-8_24

Cited by 8 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 4 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Despite the existence of related work that explores other sources of evidence about the quality of conferences (Zhuang et al 2007;Yan and Lee 2007;Souto et al 2007), our work is focused on metrics based on citations, since this is the most widely used information about venue quality and is largely available in digital libraries and other similar systems on the Web. In comparison, information such as acceptance rate, program committee characteristics, special ontologies, etc, is much harder to obtain.…”

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A comprehensive citation analysis for two main database conferences (SIGMOD and VLDB) and three database journals (TODS, VLDB Journal, and SIGMOD Record) is presented by Rahm and Thor (2005). Souto et al (2007) develop a classification model to support the (semi-)automatic evaluation of Computer Science conferences based on ontologies and inference rules.…”

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Assessing the quality of scientific conferences based on bibliographic citations

et al. 2009

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Assessing the quality of scientific conferences is an important and useful service that can be provided by digital libraries and similar systems. This is specially true for fields such as Computer Science and Electric Engineering, where conference publications are crucial. However, the majority of the existing quality metrics, particularly those relying on bibliographic citations, has been proposed for measuring the quality of journals. In this article we conduct a study about the relative performance of existing journal metrics in assessing the quality of scientific conferences. More importantly, departing from a deep analysis of the deficiencies of these metrics, we propose a new set of quality metrics especially designed to capture intrinsic and important aspects related to conferences, such as longevity, popularity, prestige, and periodicity. To demonstrate the effectiveness of the proposed metrics, we have conducted two sets of experiments that contrast their results against a ''gold standard'' produced by a large group of specialists. Our metrics obtained gains of more than 12% when compared to the most consistent journal quality metric and up to 58% when compared to standard metrics such as Thomson's Impact Factor.

show abstract

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessing the quality of scientific conferences based on bibliographic citations

et al. 2009

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…We have used SHINE (the Simple H-INdex Estimator [23]) to rank the conferences and show, e.g., that higher-impact conferences attract more submissions but tend to have lower acceptance rates. Numerous alternative approaches to ranking scientific venues have been proposed (e.g., [45,[54][55][56][57][58][59][60][61]), but they fall beyond the scope of this paper. For example, da Silva et al [59] propose a ranking scheme for scientific conferences based on ranking the PC members.…”

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

How healthy are software engineering conferences?

Vasilescu

Serebrenik

Mens

et al. 2014

Science of Computer Programming

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this article we study the health of software engineering conferences by means of a suite of metrics created for this purpose. The metrics measure stability of the community, openness to new authors, introversion, representativeness of the PC with respect to the authors' community, availability of PC candidates, and scientific prestige. Using this metrics suite, we assess the health of 11 software engineering conferences over a period of more than 10 years. In general, our findings suggest that software engineering conferences are healthy, but we observe important differences between conferences with a wide scope and those with a more narrow scope. We also find that depending on the chosen health metric, some conferences perform better than others. This knowledge may be used by prospective authors to decide in which conferences to publish, and by conference steering committees or PC chairs to assess their selection process.

show abstract

“…Inspired by this idea, many studies have applied for evaluating or ranking journals (Bar-Ilan, 2010;Harzing & van der Wal, 2009;Hua, Rousseau, & Sun, 2009;Moed, 2010;Moussa & Touzani, 2010;Ritzberger, 2008;Yu, Chen, & Pan, 2009). Some authors then transplanted the method to assess the scientific impact of science conferences (Martins, Goncalves, & Laender, 2010;Souto et al, 2007). Banks (2006) went a step farther by defining the h-index for topics and compounds.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%