Status Report on The VLDB Journal
description
Transcript of Status Report on The VLDB Journal
Status Report on The VLDB Journal
Kyu-Young Whang
VLDB 2005 PanelDatabase Publication
Practices
*Jointly prepared by Tamer Özsu, Andreas Heuer, and Holger Meyer
August 31, 2005 2Status Report on VLDB J.
Editorial Board Current Editors-in-Chief
M. Tamer Özsu (coordinating EIC) Elisa Bertino Kyu-Young Whang
New editors-in-chief Elisa Bertino (new coordinating EIC) Klaus Dittrich (a new EIC) Kyu-Young Whang
36 editors - Americas: 16, Europe: 13, Asia: 7 Tenure is 6 years. 1/3 retire every two years
Topical coverage, in particular in emerging areas, is considered
August 31, 2005 4Status Report on VLDB J.
Special Issues VLDB Conference special issue
Around six best papers per year from the VLDB conference
Thematic issue 2005: Data Management, Analysis
and Mining for the Life Sciences (4/21)
Terry Gaasterland, H.V. Jagadish and Louiqa Raschid
August 31, 2005 5Status Report on VLDB J.
Special Issues (cont’d) Earlier thematic issues
2004: Stream Data Management (5/23/2) Joseph Hellerstein and Johannes Gehrke
2003: Semantic Web (6/20/4) Yelena Yesha, Vijay Atluri, Anupam Joshi
2002: XML data management (6/25) Alon Halevy and Peter Fankhauser
2001: E-services (7/19) Fabio Casati, Dimitrios Georgakopuolos, Ming-
Chien Shan 2000: Database support for the Web (5/14)
Paolo Atzeni and Alberto Mendelzon 1998: Multimedia (6/33)
M. Tamer Özsu and Stavros Christodoulakis
August 31, 2005 6Status Report on VLDB J.
Partnership with ACM Started in January 2003
ACM provides the full-text of the VLDB Journal to subscribers of the ACM Portal/Digital Library
ACM markets the VLDB Journal to its members at a price comparable to ACM’s own journals
Journal Statistics
August 31, 2005 8Status Report on VLDB J.
1st-Round Turnaround Time
14.319.9
15.2
36.639.6
58.1
20.2
28.7
15.619.2
7.1 7.312.6
9.4 10.54.9
8.95.6 6.56.7
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003
Year Submitted
Mo
nth
s
max
avg
August 31, 2005 9Status Report on VLDB J.
Overall Turnaround Time 1)
1) Measured for all rounds that were initiated in a given year (i.e., for both original submissions and revisions)
14.319.9
15.2
36.639.6
58.1
20.2
28.7
15.619.2
6.7 7.2 6.99.9 9.4 9.2
5.08.7
5.6 6.6
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003
Year Submitted
Mo
nth
s
max
avg
August 31, 2005 10Status Report on VLDB J.
Acceptance Time 2)
2) Time from initial submission to accept decision
37.3
24.4
17.0
53.7
25.8
58.1
22.1
15.612.710.9 12.0
7.4
13.510.2 11.8
7.810.4
6.9 7.6
28.7
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003
Year Initially Submitted
Mo
nth
s
max
avg
August 31, 2005 11Status Report on VLDB J.
End-to-End Time 3)
3) Time from initial submission to publication
45.2
34.4
26.4
63.6
34.2
73.5
48.0 50.7
28.9 26.423.4
27.0
18.9 21.814.9 16.9 15.1
19.2 16.8 17.1
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003
Year Published
Mo
nth
s
max
avg
August 31, 2005 12Status Report on VLDB J.
Number of Submissions
9 10
29
4035
20 2015
62
35
58 55 55
65
78
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004
Year Submitted
Nu
mb
er o
f S
ub
mis
sio
ns
August 31, 2005 13Status Report on VLDB J.
Acceptance Rate 4)
4) Percentage of those manuscripts submitted that year that were ultimately accepted
33.3
4034.5
40
51.5
40
25
33.3
40.3
54.3
46.649.1 47.3
23.1
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003
Year Submitted
Per
cen
tag
e
August 31, 2005 14Status Report on VLDB J.
Number of Articles per Year
7
1517
1918
2019
1819
18
21 21 21
0
5
10
15
20
25
1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004
Year Published
Nu
mb
er
of
Art
icle
s
August 31, 2005 15Status Report on VLDB J.
Subscriptions
202 239 261 246 264 274 270 284222 205
53 59
54 48
31
71 80568080123
121 73
050
100150200250300350400
'96 '97 '98 '99 '00 '01 '02 '03 '04 '05 (6mo)
Springer-Institutional Springer-PersonalACM-Institutional ACM-Member
333
August 31, 2005 16Status Report on VLDB J.
Paper Downloads (full-text)
849 1,790
28,254
6,414
9,060
44,761
8319
44,263
0
10000
20000
30000
40000
50000
60000
7/00-6/01
7/01-6/02
7/02-6/03
7/03-6/04
7/04-6/05
Springer LINK ACM DL
52,582
August 31, 2005 17Status Report on VLDB J.
How do we do? Quality
Has the highest impact in ISI citation index ranking in the category of “Computer Science, Information Systems”
VLDB J.(4.545), TOIS(3.533), Information Systems(3.327), TODS(1.957), TKDE(1.223), etc.
Erhard Rahm’s study shows significant increase in references after 2000
The paper downloads have increased substantially
August 31, 2005 18Status Report on VLDB J.
How do we do? (cont’d) Review process
Review times are still long, with significant variability
We are trying hard to shorten it
Accessibility Presence in ACM Digital Library helps
enhance accessibility
August 31, 2005 19Status Report on VLDB J.
Discussion Point
Journals vs. Conferences
August 31, 2005 20Status Report on VLDB J.
Conferences Fast dissemination is the biggest merit We are concerned about “papers being lost in the noise”
(Good papers are rejected) But, we also have to worry about incomplete/incorrect
papers being accepted (Bad papers are accepted) Papers claim fancy things, but there is insufficient or
faulty proof that they work; experiments are not credible
This problem is becoming more serious as the review quality of the papers is degrading
Problems: Many papers tend to be incorrect or incomplete
Reasons: Conferences lack the processes of revision and rebuttal
August 31, 2005 21Status Report on VLDB J.
Journals handle these problems more properly by interactions between the authors and reviewers through a thorough revision process (typically, two rounds)
Authors have good chances to have potentially incorrect reviews rectified through a rebuttal process
These processes are essential since correctness and completeness are of prime importance for archival journals
Bad side: slow dissemination By the time you are rejected in two years, someone else
has published an incomplete version of a similar idea in a conference
Journals
August 31, 2005 22Status Report on VLDB J.
Inherent Differences Conferences
fast dissemination allowing some immaturity
Journals archival purposes requiring correctness and completeness
August 31, 2005 23Status Report on VLDB J.
Bridging the Gap between Journals and Conferences
Journals Trying to shorten the review time On-line availability helping fast
dissemination Conferences
Allowing revisions (e.g., rolling over some rejected papers to the same referees)
Allowing rebuttals (e.g., permitting author feedback as in SIGMOD 2005)
We are making some progress, but complete merger remains a major challenge
Thank You!
August 31, 2005 25Status Report on VLDB J.
Top five papers
All papers
Number of References 5)
5) Prepared by Erhard Rahm
August 31, 2005 26Status Report on VLDB J.
5 year average
10 year average
Number of References (cont’d)