EC accepted papers

Feeds:: Posts; Comments

« SAGT 2010

Non-archival conferences? »

EC accepted papers

March 9, 2010 by Noam Nisan

The list of accepted papers for EC 2010 has been posted.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged Conferences | 9 Comments

9 Responses

on March 9, 2010 at 7:27 pm | Reply Anonymous

Historical acceptance rates for EC have been as follows:
2010: 45/136 — 33%
2009: 40/161 — 25%
2008: 38/198 — 19%
2007: 42/154 — 27%
2006: 36/127 — 28%
2005: 32/113 — 28%
2004: 24/146 — 16%
2003: 21/110 — 19%
2001: 35/100 — 35%
2000: 29/150 — 19%
1999: 21/72 — 29%

This is the lowest number of submissions in several years, and the highest acceptance rate since 2001.

The other interesting thing is the apparent lack of papers by “real” economists. It makes one wonder how much interaction there is between the two sides of the Econ/CS “community” and whether this is just turning into an echo chamber.
- on March 10, 2010 at 6:29 am | Reply noamnisan
  
  It’s a bit hard to be too worried about the decline in number of submitted papers, as there are now several alternative venues directly aimed at AGT (e.g. SAGT and COMSOC which are pretty new), and with the high numbers of AGT papers submitted to general conferences (in TCS, AI, e.g. ICS which is new).
  
  One may certainly question the PCs decision to increase the acceptance rate, but as far as I understand, this was a deliberate decision due to a certain widening in the scope of accepted papers.
  - on March 11, 2010 at 8:34 am Ariel Procaccia
    
    The PC chairs wrote in an email to the PC that “It [the high acceptance rate, AP] is almost exclusively due to the large number of very high quality submissions we received this year.” My anecdotal impression as a PC member was that the quality of submissions was indeed very high, and it seems the acceptance threshold was naturally high as well.
    
    Picky comment: COMSOC is non-archival so it should not have an impact on the number of submissions to EC.
  - on March 12, 2010 at 5:25 pm Anonymous
    
    The reason probably for so many “high quality” papers is the large program committee.
on March 9, 2010 at 8:57 pm | Reply Anonymous2

The matchings paper by Hatfield and Kominers is by ‘real’ economists (Stanford and Harvard, resp.)

J. Hatfield and S. Kominers, Matching in Networks with Bilateral Contracts
on March 10, 2010 at 2:51 am | Reply Anonymous

usually EC gets the STOC rejects, this time the deadline was early so the AGT papers rejected from STOC were not submitted to EC. This is one reason for low submissions number.
on March 13, 2010 at 9:50 pm | Reply Non-archival conferences? « Algorithmic Game Theory

[…] A comment on my recent post mentions that ”COMSOC is non-archival so it should not have an impact on the number of […]
on July 15, 2010 at 6:05 am | Reply google tutorial

The matchings paper by Hatfield and Kominers is by ‘real’ economists (Stanford and Harvard, resp.)

J. Hatfield and S. Kominers, Matching in Networks with Bilateral Contracts
on July 15, 2010 at 6:05 am | Reply killing games

usually EC gets the STOC rejects, this time the deadline was early so the AGT papers rejected from STOC were not submitted to EC. This is one reason for low submissions number.