November is a month for conference deadlines. The STOC conference
has a submission deadline of November 6. STOC and FOCS, which is being held
November 16-19, are the two major theoretical computer science
conferences.
STOC this year is part of the 2003 Federated Computing Research
Conference in San Diego in June. Several other theory conferences
are also part of FCRC and many of them have deadlines in November or
soon thereafter.
In computer science in general and theoretical computer science in particular,
conferences are the primary outlet for announcement and publication of
results. Since computer science is a relatively young discipline, the
field changes dramatically year to year and the usual long process of
journal publications might often publish outdated work. More mature
fields like mathematics and physics use journals as the primary source
of publication.
The main disadvantage of the computer science system is that while
computer scientists are encouraged to submit their work to refereed
journals, many of the important papers in the area never make it that
far.
There have been at least two recent major exceptions to this
process. Alexander Razborov wrote a paper last
spring on lower bounds on quantum communication complexity that would
have been the best quantum paper in FOCS if not the best
paper. Instead he chose to submit it directly to a journal, Izvestiya
of the Russian Academy of Science: Mathematics. The
Agrawal-Kayal-Saxena Primality
Paper which would easily be the best paper at the upcoming STOC is
not being submitted to a conference either but directly to Annals of
Mathematics. "Why should I send it to a conference," Manindra Agrawal
asks, "when everyone already knows the result?"
Are these two papers a trend? Are conferences less important as papers
are easily available online? Or is computer science finally becoming a
mature field?