Poster Session
Submission Instructions
- Deadline: 23:59, Sunday, March 23, 2025.
- Submit your poster abstract on the Registration page:
- Enter discount code "posteraccepted!" for free registration
and click "Continue".
- On the next page, enter your title and abstract, along with
other information.
- If you are a student and applying for travel support, check
"Yes" to the travel support question.
- Your teammates could register the same way for free
registration, but no need to submit your abstract again.
- Keep your poster size 36 inch by 24 inch or smaller.
- Some templates and R packages for creating posters with RMarkdown may be
useful.
Student Presenter
Travel Support
Limited number of student travel supports for out-of-state
students are available from a National Science Foundation conference
grant. Please indicate application for travel support when
submitting your poster abstract. We will contact candidates at a
later time for more information.
Student Poster Award
- Posters submitted by students enter a Student Poster Award
competition.
- The poster review committee scores the student posters (see
criteria below).
- The Student Poster Award will be presented at the closing
ceremony.
Student Poster
Evaluation Criteria
The evaluation should focus on four key points:
- Motivation: a clearly presented answer to “Why do we
care?”
- Innovation: a clearly presented answer to “Why is this new
or different?
- Execution: a clearly presented answer to “How well did they
succeed?”
- Contribution: a clearly presented answer to “What did they
leave behind?
Each of those four facets is worth 10 “points”, for 40 points
total. Scores for each facet are “free form”, but all 4 must be
considered independently. Some aspects to consider for each of
the above:
- Motivation:
- Is it clear what problem is being tackled?
- Is the problem “important” to the community?
- If so, Is it clear from the poster why it’s an important
consideration?
- Innovation:
- Is something novel? (The approach, the results, the problem
space, etc.? Not all need to be, but something should be!)
- Is how this fits in the broader context of what came before
clearly stated?
- Are potential limitations presented openly?
- Execution:
- Is it clear what the result of the work is (regardless of
its significance or “success”)?
- Does this result improve the state-of-the-art (note:
validating prior work or aggregating previous results, etc.
certainly qualifies!)
- Are the “results” validated somehow, and do you “trust”
them?
- Contribution:
- Is there some artifact “left behind” (source is best, but
web apps, etc. qualify)
- Could you validate or reproduce this work if you wanted
to?
- Do you feel the poster and leave-behinds help build and
foster further engagement? (i.e. are they good teaching tools,
or have other hooks that will persist past the conference?)