You are here:

• Macquarie Home »
• Faculty of Science »
• Department of Computing

MCMC Home Page
MCMC-09 Program Committee
MCMC-09 Technical Program
Interview Panels and Schedule
2nd round MCMC-09 Technical Program
2nd round Interview Panels and Schedule

Eighth Macquarie Computing Mini-Conference (MCMC-09)

In the second week of June, 2009, the Macquarie Computing Mini-Conference will be held for the eighth consecutive year. It will be organized similar to the way it was done in 2008. One major change compared to last year relates to the review process: students will be required to submit their work under a given category/area. Review of the papers submitted under a particular category will be moderated by the relevant area chair.

This page will provide relevant information on:

Date and Venue for MCMC-09
How is MCMC-09 different from MCMC-08?
Who can submit work?
What to submit?
    Initial Submission
    Final Submission
How to Submit?
Time Line
How to produce a good abstract and slides -- tips and samples
How to write a helpful review
Easychair Related Info
Who to Contact?

Conference Date and Venue

                      June 10-12, 2009
                      Building E6A, Room 102
                      Macquarie University, Sydney, Australia

How is MCMC-09 different from MCMC-08?

Unlike in MCMC-08, student will need to identify the category (area) that their work best fits in. The areas available are:

1. Cryptography
2. Databases
3. Data Mining and Analysis
4. Human-centred Computing
5. Information Protection and Security
6. Language Technology
7. Programming Languages
8. Rational Agents and Knowledge Representation
9. Web Services and Business Processes
10. Other

Browsing through the technical program of MCMC-08 will give an idea of where your work is likely to belong. Each category (area of research) has its own area chair -- the list is provided at the MCMC-09 Program Committee page.

Reviews of works submitted under a particular category will be moderated by the corresponding area chair, whose task is to make sure that there's a common set of expectations among reviewers before the reviews go to the students.

Who can submit work?

This forum is primarily intended to facilitate research training of (research) students enrolled in the Department of Computing, Macquarie University. Hence all Computing research students (Honours and Masters included) are invited to submit their work to this forum. All Doctoral students who joined the PhD program prior to January 2009, and are not expected to submit by September 2009 are required to submit to this forum. Exceptions may be made in case the supervisors in question make a really strong case why a student in this category should not present at MCMC-09. All other Doctoral students are strongly encouraged to submit to this forum.

What to submit?

Students will submit materials in two stages: (a) initial submission to receive feedback (by May 24th), and (b) final, revised submission (by June 12th).

Initial Submission:

Students are expected to submit two items by the initial submission date (May 24th), zipped together into a single file:

1. Abstract of the (proposed) thesis -- in about 300 words (less than one standard page), in pdf format. The abstracts will be reviewed by a select group of reviewers, and the students will get the feedback before submitting the final version, and
2. Slides that you will use for presentation purpose -- about seven or eight, in pdf or ppt. The reviewers may or may not provide comments on the slides -- it is up to their discretion. It is our experience from MCMC-08 that reviewers in general provided feedback on the slides as well as on the abstract.

As to the content of the abstract and slides, your thesis supervisor is at the best position to advise. We do have some tips and a sample below.

We expect each abstract to receive feedback from four reviewers:

1. an academic who is an expert in the area
2. an academic from outside the area
3. a new PhD student, and
4. an experienced PhD student.

Your slides might also receive some feedback.

Final Submission:

After the review period, the students will get about five days to take the comments into account before the presentation. By June 12, they should submit:

1. The revised and final version of the abstract -- in about 300 words (one standard page).
2. A self-assessment report (1-2 pages) outlining:
   1. Research Progress to Date -- List of major tasks completed since their last annual review.
   2. Research papers published or submitted, or any other significant research achievement since last review.
   3. Next Year's Plan -- List of problems you intend to tackle in course of the next year
   4. Other Issues -- List any impediment to your research progress since last annual review (e.g., major illness, delays in obtaining experimental equipment, difficulties with supervision, language difficulties, etc.).
3. Optionally, a sample of your written research work (recent publication/submission).

How to Submit?

As in the last year years, MCMC-09 will use facilities made available by the EasyChair Conference System whose contribution is hereby being duly acknowledged. All students who wish to submit their work for MCMC-09 must register at the EasyChair MCMC-09 site as an author. Please do so at your earliest convenience by clicking here and then following the appropriate steps. Please bear in mind that if you do not already have an EasyChair account, you will need to create an account before registering as an author for MCMC-08. Provide the title as the title as well as the abstract for registration purpose.

A single zipped file should be submitted. This file should contain the abstract and slides (and self assessment report plus possibly sample work for final submission) as distinct pdf documents. The naming convention illustrated below should be followed:

1. John Smith's abstract should be named: JSmith_abstract.pdf
2. John Smith's slides should be named: JSmith_slides.pdf
3. John Smith's assessment report should be named: JSmith_assessment.pdf (for final submission)
4. John Smith's sample work should be named: JSmith_sample.pdf (for final submission)
5. John Smith's zipped file should be named: JSmith.zip

Timeline

The tentative time line of events is as follows:

1. Students' work submission deadline: May 24
2. Abstract bidding and assignment: May 26-28
3. Reviews due: June 04
4. Students receive feedback: June 05
5. Mini-Conference: June 10-12
6. Students submit final version: June 12
7. Student review by panel: June 15

For genuine cases of students who cannot absolutely make it to the mini-conference (i.e., presentation+panel interview), there will be another, one off, supplementary mini-conference. Such students should contact the Program Chairs as soon as possible.

How to produce a good abstract and slides -- tips and samples

Abstract

In general, keep the guiding principles below in mind:

1. The purpose of the abstract is to outline the (planned) structure and content of your thesis. We know that you won't have a complete thesis abstract until you submit, but this abstract should explain your research questions and outline your approaches to tackling them, in such a way that it can grow into your final thesis abstract.

   At UQ, this use of an abstract during a PhD is described as a writing tool that "will help you to carry a short version of your thesis in your head. This will focus your thinking on what it is you are really doing, help you [and us -- MD] to see the relevance of what you are currently working on within the bigger picture, and help to keep the links which will eventually unify your thesis."

2. Consequently, the abstract should provide the big picture, and put the research question in context.

   There's no one correct structure for such an abstract. One possible structure is to start by explaining the background, and consequently why what you're tackling is a worthwhile problem (one paragraph); then follow that by explaining the key idea in your thesis (one paragraph); and then describe how you developed or explored that idea (or are currently developing or exploring it, or will develop or explore it) along with any results you might have already (one paragraph per approach taken to exploring the idea).

3. The abstract should be well-written:
   • Don't make sentences too long and convoluted.
   • Don't launch straight into jargon, and only use it where necessary.
   • Each paragraph should be self contained, and with a clear focus.
   • The transition between one paragraph and next should not be abrupt.
   • The end of the abstract should be self-evident to the reader.

4. If you submitted an abstract last year, then we'd expect that for this year's abstract there wouldn't be too many changes to the previous one. This year's one should just reflect any new results, any changes in direction or emphasis that have occurred over the year, or any reformulating of your topic that you've come up with in the course of thinking about it over the year.

Some other resources you might look at:

• Advice on thesis abstract writing from the University of Queensland.

• Advice on thesis abstract writing from Monash University.

• A sample from last year's MCMC, which received the highest score from reviewers.

Slides

1. In the introduction provide a clear background to your research topic. Give a simple example to set the context.
2. Use plain English. Judiciously chosen diagrams help a lot. Give the big picture, and tell how what you are doing/ planning to do fits in this picture.
3. Make sure the research question is crystal clear.
4. You should include some discussion of the technical details of your own work -- a new algorithm you've developed, an analysis of data you've done, etc -- but keep it simple. You can assume that your audience is knowledgeable in general computer science and/or information systems, but not in your specific topic. Keep in mind that some of the reviewers are non-experts, and it should not completely throw them off!
5. Towards the end, in a "Discussion" slide, tell in very clear terms what you have achieved, particularly keeping the big picture in mind. Identify what other problems need to be addressed.
6. Give an idea of when/how you are going to address the rest of the problems.

How to write a helpful review

Easychair-related info

Using Easychair could prove frustrating at times. Please keep the following items in mind which might help you out:

1. You may already have one or more Easychair accounts. It is best to merge them into one. Easychair provides a facility to merge multiple accounts. For this purpose, login to Easychair and go to EasyChair --> My Account, and follow the steps.
2. It is best to tell Easychair which email addresses you are using. This year around, emails from easychair will be sent out to username@science.mq.edu.au whereas Easychair might know you either as username@ics.mq.edu.au or as username@comp.mq.edu.au or as some other private address such as username@gmail.com. Telling Easychair that all these addresses are yours helps. Easychair provides a facility for doing this. As before, for this purpose, login to Easychair and go to EasyChair --> My Account, and follow the appropriate steps.

Who to Contact?

This is a living document. Please stay tuned for further announcements. Should you have any query at this point, please feel free to contact Dr. Abhaya C. Nayak (abhaya AT science DOT mq DOT edu DOT au), Computing HDR Director, who will be the program chair for MCMC-09. Alternatively you may contact Dr. Mark Dras (madras AT science DOT mq DOT edu DOT au), the program co-chair.