Enhancing the Peer Review Process (2)

Part 2 of 2: Your Fifteen Minute Presentation (Spotlight’s on You)

(Continue from previous post)

My first technical presentation in a conference was not memorable at all. I’m sure the audience won’t recall anything related to my presentation. There were some questions, which were answered promptly. Otherwise, I didn’t think anyone got much from my fifteen minute slide show. Like any novice presenter, I think I answered the questions directly. If someone had asked "What is ONE plus ONE?", I would have answered "Two" and moved on.

That was then. With more experience and wisdom on my belt (and certainly a lot more grey hairs to prove it), I would argue that discussions about a paper should persist beyond just the publication and presentation. There are many insights into the research and its contribution that are easily missed in today’s peer review format. In this day and age, we ought to be able to use online resources to have a good debate and interact with the authors. The old medium, consisting of the proceedings and the verbal presentation, just doesn’t "cut it anymore". We should all explore new tools and medium that can better do the job. I am reminded of this interesting note about using the right tool despite what others consider acceptable in the status quo. Even Scotty from Star Trek would have said, "How many times da I have to tell ya...the right tool for the right job!" (Star Trek V: The Final Frontier).

It is highly unlikely that everyone at a conference had a chance to read every single paper in the proceedings and is ready with a list of thoughtful questions. Nevermind the fact that there are multiple tracks in the conference and tens of topics in different subject matter. And nevermind the fact that everyone is preparing his or her own presentation. CVPR 2008, for example, had multiple overlapping sessions with over a hundred paper and poster submissions. With all of these distractions, the question/answer session would probably not be very effective.

On the other hand, having an online discussion, perhaps before and after the conference event, would greatly enhance the quality and level of participation at the presentation. Not only will the audience better appreciate the research and results, the authors themselves would have a chance to hone their presentation (and perhaps direction). And when someone in the audience asks, "What is ONE plus ONE?", perhaps the author would think about why the question was asked rather than the answer of "TWO".

(fini)