BOBCATSSS 2009 symposium @ Porto, Portugal, 28—30 January 2009
Happy new year on behalf of the BOBCATSSS 2009 team members as well! We are back to work. There is still much to do, especially all kinds of practical matters. Final preparations are underway.
The programme of the symposium is now available as web pages, in addition to existing PDF files: day 1, day 2, and day 3. Abstracts of the presentations and further details will be added in the near future.
The programme of the symposium has now been published. At least at the moment it is only available in PDF format: day 1, day 2, and day 3. There are three parts; one for each day of the symposium.
We still reserve the right to make changes, but there shouldn’t be any major ones. This means that you can start planning your own conference schedule. Abstracts and closer details will be published later.
Update 2008-12-19: All full papers, workshops and posters are now listed on one page in the programme section.
We are proud to announce the keynote speakers of BOBCATSSS 2009! The speakers will present their ideas and visions relating to the themes of the symposium:
We have also now published the preliminary programme (PDF) of the symposium.
The programme is the very first published version, and changes will very probably be made. It should, however, give you a glimpse of the events which will take place.
The criteria of acceptance for BOBCATSSS 2009 is quite similar to other scientific conferences: the papers, posters and workshops have to present new and interesting research to the target group of the symposium and, broadly speaking, stay within the topic area. There can be other considerations in the building of the programme as well, for example the balance of the different sub-topics and the balance of the presenters. BOBCATSSS’s main target group is students, and student contributions are favoured, everything else equal.
There are 10 reviewers in total from the University of Porto and the University of Tampere, who do the initial grading of the proposals. Two teachers review all abstracts, and each student member reviews a lesser portion. In addition to a recommendation of acceptance on a 1 to 6 scale (e.g. must accept, probable reject), the reviewers can fill in a category (e.g. theoretical, practical), information about the value added, appropriate length, comments, and so on. Every abstract receives a grade from six reviewers.
In the end, we unfortunately cannot accept all proposals, for limits exist. It is possible that even very good abstracts have to be rejected, if, for example, two proposals have nearly the same focus.
