2
$\begingroup$

Let's say you submit a paper to a TCS conference and it is accepted. Then you go there and give a talk. When you put this information in your CV;

  1. do you write it as two items in different sections; first in conferences and second the published paper or just as one single thing?
  2. if the paper is published in some sort of a book (book of abstracts, LNCS, etc) with ISBN, will you cite it as conference paper or as book chapter?

Thanks

$\endgroup$
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ I keep a list of talks/posters on my website (so that I can include links to slides, and such). When I was applying for grad school I had them in my CV, too... but I think once you have enough talks it becomes too much info. On some senior researchers' CVs I've seen very compact talk lists: they include their invited or conference talks as acronyms/university names and lists of years, just to show that they go places regularly. $\endgroup$ – Artem Kaznatcheev Jul 11 '11 at 8:24
  • $\begingroup$ both of these could be answers :) $\endgroup$ – Suresh Venkat Jul 11 '11 at 8:28
6
$\begingroup$

Converting/extending a comment to an answer:

  1. I keep a list of talks/posters on my website. I do this to include links to slides, photos and video recordings. When I was applying for grad school I had them in my CV, too. I have the impression that it might have helped. However, once you have a lot of talks it becomes too much info. On some senior researchers' CVs I've seen very compact talk lists: they include their invited or conference talks as acronyms/university names and lists of years. For example, if they regularly present at STOC they might write "STOC 2003,2004,2007". I think this is mostly to show that they are involved with the community and go places regularly.

  2. As Dave mentioned, it is usually standard to cite the paper as a conference. I think the exception is when conferences publish their proceedings, or selected papers, as a special issue of a journal. The only time this happened to me, I had to go through an extra layer of review (first conference, then the journal) for one paper, so I think is appropriate to cite those as journal papers.

  3. A lot of time papers are first published in conferences, and then a year (or more!) later a longer version appears in a journal. The convention is to cite this as a journal paper with a note after: "preliminary version appeared in Conference X 2008".

$\endgroup$
5
$\begingroup$

My vita has a list of invited talks but not of contributed talks. But when we get reviewed every three years, the review committee also wants to know about the contributed talks, in a separate section of their recent activity forms from the section on conference publications.

The trickier issue is conferences like SIGGRAPH for which the conference proceedings is a special issue of a journal. My vita has separate sections for conferences and journals, and in that case I just list it in the conference section, not the journal section. You could list it both places, but in that case both entries needs to include an explicit statement that it's the same as the other entry in the other place, so you avoid the appearance of trying to double-count.

$\endgroup$
4
$\begingroup$
  1. I would just put the publication on my CV, though in the early stage of your career listing the presentations you've made isn't a bad idea.

  2. Cite as a conference paper if the 'book' is the proceedings of the conference.

$\endgroup$

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.