URI:
   DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Osmania Ortho
  HTML https://osmaniaortho.createaforum.com
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       *****************************************************
   DIR Return to: General Discussion
       *****************************************************
       #Post#: 71--------------------------------------------------
       Paper presentation--Tips and tricks
       By: osmaniaortho Date: March 14, 2012, 8:00 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Some tips for preparing your paper presentation
       First, organize your talk:
       Read the entire paper at least 3 times.
       You need to be able to explain the details in the paper (even
       the ugly tricky notation)
       You need to be able to provide a critical analysis of the paper
       Check out references in the related work section of the paper.
       (this will help you put the paper in context of a larger body of
       work and will help you critique the paper's
       results/contributions)
       Look at Paper Reading Advice for more details.
       Find the important ideas A paper has many details but only one
       or two main ideas; structure your talk around these main ideas.
       Create a Talk Outline
       Your talk should be organized in a top-down manner.
       You should have the following main sections in your talk:
       Introduction, The Big Picture: what, why, how, and why we should
       care (motivation). Be sure to include:
       a statement of the problem being solved (what)
       motivation and putting the work in context (why and why should
       we care)
       a high-level view of the author's solution (how)
       Details of solution
       Results demonstrating/proving their solution
       Critic of Work (possibly compare to related work)
       Conclusions & Future Directions for this work
       The talk should be organized as the important ideas first, the
       details second, conclusions last. Each section of your talk
       should be organized in a similar manor: high-level important
       points first, details second, summarize high-level points last.
       If the paper is well written, you can use the paper's
       organization as a guide.
       Next, Design your slides
       Slide Organization Your slides should be organized like an
       outline--a few main points, with sub points under each one.
       Your slides are a guide for your talk not a word-for-word copy
       of your talk. List specific points that you want to talk about
       as sub-topics of each main topic. If there are particular
       details that you want to discuss, outline them on the slide and
       keep written notes for you to refer to in your talk rather than
       writing all the details on the slide.
       Summarize Main Points You should have a summary slide of the
       main ideas at the end.
       If applicable, Include a list of open questions from the paper
       It is okay to waste space Add just enough prose prose to present
       the main points and highlight the main parts of each point. Use
       phrases rather than complete sentences and use large fonts. You
       can use acronyms and abbreviations sparingly, however you should
       say the complete name when you talk about about them. For
       example, if you abbreviate processes to procs on a slide, say
       "processes" when you talk about the point not "procs".
       Similarly, if your create an acronym for your super fast
       multi-cast implementation SFMC and refer to the old slow
       multi-cast implementation as OSMC, then say "our super fast
       multi-cast" and "the old slow multi-cast" rather than "SFMC" and
       "OSMC". The exception is for well-known acronyms such as PVM,
       MPI, API, JVM, etc.
       A picture is worth a thousand words Use figures and graphs to
       explain implementation and results. It is very hard to describe
       a system implementation without having a picture of the
       components of the system. I once attended a talk about Intel's
       I64 architecture where the speaker tried to discuss the details
       of the layout of the chip and the interactions between the
       components without having any figures. It made for a very bad
       talk and a very hostile audience.
       Number of Slides As a general rule, it should take 2-3 minutes
       to talk through the material on one slide, so for a 45 minute
       talk you should have about 20 slides.
       If there is too much material in a paper to present completely
       in 45 minutes, then pick one part (the most
       interesting/important part) that you will discuss in detail, and
       present the other parts at a higher level. You can create
       back-up slides for specific details that you don't plan to talk
       about, but may get questions about.
       Next, preparing your presentation
       Provide a talk road-map Tell audience where you are going with
       your talk.
       Give audience a road-map of your talk at the beginning by using
       outline slides
       Immediately after the title slide, put up an outline slide and
       tell the audience the main organization of your talk. Another
       alternative is to first have a few slides motivating the paper's
       general topic, then put up an outline slide giving the audience
       a road-map of your talk.
       It should be clear when you start a new high-level part of your
       talk
       Use good transitions from one slide to the next, and from one
       main topic to the next..."We just talked about the
       implementation of foo now we will look at how well foo performs
       for synthetic and real workloads.
       You may want to use the outline slide at other points in your
       talk to provide a visual transition between parts.
       Repeat Your Point There is a rule that says you have to tell
       your audience something three times before the really hear it:
       Tell them what you are going to say.
       Say it.
       Summarize what you said.
       This is particularly important for figures and graphs. For
       example:
       This graph show how the A algorithm performs better than the B
       and C algorithms as the number of nodes increase
       The X axis is number of nodes, the Y axis is execution time in
       seconds The red curve shows the execution time of A as the
       number of nodes increases The blue curve shows ...
       Thus you can see that as the number of nodes increases above N,
       the A algorithm performs better. This is because of increased
       message traffic in algorithms B and C as shown on the next
       slide...
       Explain concepts in your own words It is certainly okay to lift
       key phrases from the paper to use in your talk. However, you
       should also try to summarize the main ideas of the paper in your
       own words.
       Talk to the Audience Don't read your slide off the screen, nor
       directly off the projector. It is okay to stop for a second and
       refer to your notes if you need to.
       Practice Give a practice run-through of your talk. Stand in a
       room for 1 hour and talk through all your slides (out loud).
       This should be a timed dress rehearsal (don't stop and fix
       slides as you go). Members of your reading group should provide
       a practice audience for you.
       Nervousness: How to fight back
       A well organized, practiced talk will almost always go well. If
       you draw a blank, then looking at your slides will help you get
       back on track.
       Taking a deep breath will clam you down. One trick is to try to
       remember to take a deep breath between each slide.
       Slow down. Take a few seconds to think about a question that is
       being asked before you answer it. It is okay to pause for a few
       seconds between points and between slides; a second or two of
       silence between points is noticeable only to you, but if you are
       talking a mile a minute everyone will notice.
       Bring notes. if you are afraid that you will forget a point or
       will forget your elegant transition between slides 11 and 12,
       write these down on a piece of paper and bring it with you.
       However, you don't want to have a verbatim copy of your talk,
       instead write down key phrases that you want to remember to say.
       Give at least one practice talk to an audience.
       Be prepared to answer questions. You don't have to know the
       answer to every question, however you should be prepared to
       answer questions and able to answer most questions about the
       paper. Before you give the talk, think about what questions you
       are likely to get, and how you would answer them. You may want
       to have back-up slides ready for answering certain questions.
       It is okay to say "I don't know" or better yet "gee, I hadn't
       thought about that, but one possible approach would be to..." or
       to refer to your notes to answer questions.
       #Post#: 72--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Paper presentation--Tips and tricks
       By: osmaniaortho Date: March 14, 2012, 8:02 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Tips for Writing Technical Papers
  HTML http://infolab.stanford.edu/~widom/paper-writing.html
       Paper Title
       The Abstract
       The Introduction
       Related Work
       The Body
       Performance Experiments
       The Conclusions
       Future Work
       The Acknowledgements
       Citations
       Appendices
       Grammar and Small-Scale Presentation Issues
       Mechanics
       Versions and Distribution
       Running Example
       As a running (fictitious!) example, suppose you've designed and
       run experiments with a new algorithm for external multipass
       merge-sort. Your algorithm reduces the complexity from O(n log
       n) to O(n), under the premise that it's acceptable to have some
       bounded "unsortedness" in the result. You plan to write up the
       results for submission to a major conference.
       Note: This example was used throughout the live presentation but
       I haven't followed through much in these notes. Thus, the notes
       include several exercises for the reader.
       Paper Title
       Titles can be long and descriptive:
       Linear-Time External Multipass Sorting with Approximation
       Guarantees
       or short and sweet:
       Approximate External Sort
       Here's a middle-of-the-road length, plus a cute name that sticks
       in people's minds:
       Floosh: A Linear-Time Algorithm for Approximate External Sort
       The Abstract
       State the problem, your approach and solution, and the main
       contributions of the paper. Include little if any background and
       motivation. Be factual but comprehensive. The material in the
       abstract should not be repeated later word for word in the
       paper.
       (Exercise: Write an abstract for the multiway sort example.)
       The Introduction
       The Introduction is crucially important. By the time a referee
       has finished the Introduction, he's probably made an initial
       decision about whether to accept or reject the paper -- he'll
       read the rest of the paper looking for evidence to support his
       decision. A casual reader will continue on if the Introduction
       captivated him, and will set the paper aside otherwise. Again,
       the Introduction is crucially important.
       Here is the Stanford InfoLab's patented five-point structure for
       Introductions. Unless there's a good argument against it, the
       Introduction should consist of five paragraphs answering the
       following five questions:
       What is the problem?
       Why is it interesting and important?
       Why is it hard? (E.g., why do naive approaches fail?)
       Why hasn't it been solved before? (Or, what's wrong with
       previous proposed solutions? How does mine differ?)
       What are the key components of my approach and results? Also
       include any specific limitations.
       (Exercise: Answer these questions for the multiway sort
       example.)
       Then have a final paragraph or subsection: "Summary of
       Contributions". It should list the major contributions in bullet
       form, mentioning in which sections they can be found. This
       material doubles as an outline of the rest of the paper, saving
       space and eliminating redundancy.
       (Exercise: Write the bullet list for the multiway sort example.)
       Related Work
       The perennial question: Should related work be covered near the
       beginning of the paper or near the end?
       Beginning, if it can be short yet detailed enough, or if it's
       critical to take a strong defensive stance about previous work
       right away. In this case Related Work can be either a subsection
       at the end of the Introduction, or its own Section 2.
       End, if it can be summarized quickly early on (in the
       Introduction or Preliminaries), or if sufficient comparisons
       require the technical content of the paper. In this case Related
       Work should appear just before the Conclusions, possibly in a
       more general section "Discussion and Related Work".
       The Body
       Guideline #1: A clear new important technical contribution
       should have been articulated by the time the reader finishes
       page 3 (i.e., a quarter of the way through the paper).
       Guideline #2: Every section of the paper should tell a story.
       (Don't, however, fall into the common trap of telling the entire
       story of how you arrived at your results. Just tell the story of
       the results themselves.) The story should be linear, keeping the
       reader engaged at every step and looking forward to the next
       step. There should be no significant interruptions -- those can
       go in the Appendix; see below.
       Aside from these guidelines, which apply to every paper, the
       structure of the body varies a lot depending on content.
       Important components are:
       Running Example: When possible, use a running example throughout
       the paper. It can be introduced either as a subsection at the
       end of the Introduction, or its own Section 2 or 3 (depending on
       Related Work).
       Preliminaries: This section, which follows the Introduction and
       possibly Related Work and/or Running Example, sets up notation
       and terminology that is not part of the technical contribution.
       One important function of this section is to delineate material
       that's not original but is needed for the paper. Be concise --
       remember the critical rule of thumb.
       Content: The meat of the paper includes algorithms, system
       descriptions, new language constructs, analyses, etc. Whenever
       possible use a "top-down" description: readers should be able to
       see where the material is going, and they should be able to skip
       ahead and still get the idea.
       Performance Experiments
       We could have an entire treatise on this topic alone and I am
       surely not the expert. Here are some random thoughts:
       Many conferences expect experiments.
       It's easy to do "hokey" or meaningless experiments, and many
       papers do.
       It's easy to craft experiments to show your work in its best
       light, and most papers do.
       What should performance experiments measure? Possiblities:
       Pure running time
       Sensitivity to important parameters
       Scalability in various aspects: data size, problem complexity,
       ...
       Others?
       What should performance experiments show? Possibilities:
       Absolute performance (i.e., it's acceptable/usable)
       Relative performance to naive approaches
       Relative performance to previous approaches
       Relative performance among different proposed approaches
       Others?
       The Conclusions
       In general a short summarizing paragraph will do, and under no
       circumstances should the paragraph simply repeat material from
       the Abstract or Introduction. In some cases it's possible to now
       make the original claims more concrete, e.g., by referring to
       quantitative performance results.
       Future Work
       This material is important -- part of the value of a paper is
       showing how the work sets new research directions. I like bullet
       lists here. (Actually I like them in general.) A couple of
       things to keep in mind:
       If you're actively engaged in follow-up work, say so. E.g.: "We
       are currently extending the algorithm to... blah blah, and
       preliminary results are encouraging." This statement serves to
       mark your territory.
       Conversely, be aware that some researchers look to Future Work
       sections for research topics. My opinion is that there's nothing
       wrong with that -- consider it a complement.
       The Acknowledgements
       Don't forget them or you'll have people with hurt feelings.
       Acknowledge anyone who contributed in any way: through
       discussions, feedback on drafts, implementation, etc. If in
       doubt about whether to include someone, include them.
       Citations
       Spend the effort to make all citations complete and consistent.
       Do not just copy random inconsistent BibTex (or other) entries
       from the web and call it a day. Check over your final
       bibliography carefully and make sure every entry looks right.
       Appendices
       Appendices should contain detailed proofs and algorithms only.
       Appendices can be crucial for overlength papers, but are still
       useful otherwise. Think of appendices as random-access
       substantiation of underlying gory details. As a rule of thumb:
       Appendices should not contain any material necessary for
       understanding the contributions of the paper.
       Appendices should contain all material that most readers would
       not be interested in.
       Grammar and Small-Scale Presentation Issues
       In general everyone writing papers is strongly encouraged to
       read the short and very useful The Elements of Style  by Strunk
       and White. Here's a random list of pet peeves.
       Just like a program, all "variables" (terminology and notation)
       in the paper should be defined before being used, and should be
       defined only once. (Exception: Sometimes after a long hiatus
       it's useful to remind the reader of a definition.) Global
       definitions should be grouped into the Preliminaries section;
       other definitions should be given just before their first use.
       Do not use "etc." unless the remaining items are completely
       obvious.
       Acceptable: We shall number the phases 1, 3, 5, 7, etc.
       Unacceptable: We measure performance factors such as volatility,
       scalability, etc.
       Never say "for various reasons". (Example: We decided not to
       consider the alternative, for various reasons.) Tell the reader
       the reasons!
       Avoid nonreferential use of "this", "that", "these", "it", and
       so on (Ullman pet peeve). Requiring explicit identification of
       what "this" refers to enforces clarity of writing. Here is a
       typical example of nonreferential "this": Our experiments test
       several different environments and the algorithm does well in
       some but not all of them. This is important because ...
       (Exercise: The above rule is violated at least once in this
       document. Find the violations.)
       Italics are for definitions or quotes, not for emphasis (Gries
       pet peeve). Your writing should be constructed such that context
       alone provides sufficient emphasis.
       (Exercise: The above rule is violated at least once in this
       document. Find the violations.)
       People frequently use "which" versus "that" incorrectly. "That"
       is defining; "which" is nondefining. Examples of correct use:
       The algorithms that are easy to implement all run in linear
       time.
       The algorithms, which are easy to implement, all run in linear
       time.
       Mechanics
       Always run a spelling checker on your final paper, no excuses.
       For drafts and technical reports use 11 point font, generous
       spacing, 1" margins, and single-column format. There's no need
       to torture your casual readers with the tiny fonts and tight
       spacing used in conference proceedings these days.
       In drafts and final camera-ready, fonts in figures should be no
       smaller than the font size in the body of the paper.
       Tables, figures, graphs, and algorithms should always be placed
       on the top of a page or column, not in the body of the text
       unless it is very small and fits into the flow of the paper.
       Every table, figure, graph, or algorithm should appear on the
       same page as its first reference, or on the following page
       (LaTex willing...).
       Before final submission or publication of your paper, print it
       once and take a look -- you might be quite surprised how
       different it looks on paper from how it looked on your screen
       (if you even bothered to look at it after you ran Latex the last
       time...).
       Versions and Distribution
       Many papers have a submitted (and later published) conference
       version, along with a "full paper" technical report on the web.
       It's important to manage versions carefully, both in content and
       proliferation. My recommendation is, whenever possible, for the
       full paper to consist of simply the conference version plus
       appendices. The full paper should be the only public one aside
       from conference proceedings, it should be coordinated with
       latest (final) conference version, and modifications to the full
       paper should always overwrite all publicly accessible previous
       versions of it.
       I believe in putting papers on the web the minute they're
       finished. They should be dated and can be referenced as
       technical reports -- it's not necessary to have an actual
       technical report number. Never, ever put up a paper with a
       conference copyright notice when it's only been submitted, and
       never, ever reference a paper as "submitted to conference X."
       You're only asking for embarrassment when the paper is finally
       published in conference Y a year or two later.
       *****************************************************