Debate: Should presentation be shared or deliberative?

[CyFeng16]

Debate:

1. Should AMC be shared or deliberative?
2. How to make a trade-off between two different directions?
3. If the presentation involves different pre-knowledge, how can we guarantee the maximum revenue for the audience?
4. Are there different solutions for different scenarios of the posters and orals?

Welcome all your opinions. @Duan-JM @hwfan

[CyFeng16]

In other words, how to get the participants to achieve Pareto efficiency. Thus, let people participate in each phase of AMC to obtain optimal benefits. Also @ArronHZG @cgpeter96 @gaojiuy , we look forward to hearing the voices of all members.

[newip]

What's the cause of this discussion?

[CyFeng16]

The areas and articles shared by the speaker need more or less some pre-knowledge to understand. When the audience itself has a large deviation from the understanding of this part of the pre-knowledge, the degree of acceptance of the speech will be quite different. The problem is that at this point we should focus on communicating with that small group of professionals or the general public.

[CyFeng16]

@newip Considering the constantly new blood to join the club, this is something that has to be openly discussed. Any suggestions are welcomed. :)

[hwfan]

I was the vice chair of the last CV meeting of AMC. I found a problem that some of the lecturers use much time to contact with audience about whether they are clear enough. Therefore I came up with this discussion in the summary of meeting to arouse more attention to this problem.

[Duan-JM]

We need to discuss the goal of the meetings is to let the audience learn the paper's core idea or just recommend the paper.

Also, we need to pay attention to the problem when and how the audience to contact the poster/oral.

[hwfan]

In my opinion, it's a trade-off between TUTORIAL and SEMINAR. In academical conferences such as CVPR, these two meetings are separated so that the audiences could choose the meeting which matches them more. When it comes to AMC, I think we should recall the objective of AMC Seminar Sign Up: the details of papers in the meeting should be fully included. It means that if audiences are not clear about the papers, they should refer to this sign up after the meeting. Therefore with respect to this rule, I think AMC is a SEMINAR rather than a TUTORIAL.

[CyFeng16]

Then, an essential question is how to quantify the degree of satisfaction of the audience? Only when we have a method of quantifying satisfaction and knowledge acceptance, can we know which way is best for everyone as well as for the whole club.

[Duan-JM]

Actually, I think maybe this can be a choice for chairs or poster/oral to determine whether his/her presentation to be tutorial or seminar.

Ps. I indeed agree with the audience should read the papers’ abstract first.

[newip]

In AMC guideline, there is a topic plan to forecast the topics or interesting directions. That is a good point to get something in mind. How to use it well?

Agree with @CyFeng16 and @Duan-JM , the objective is important. I think we need to get the event to share the latest update from Academic or the classic topics to make members be creative and inspiring.

[CyFeng16]

The above problems generally occur only when and only during the ORAL presentation, especially considering that the POSTER's time requirements are limited. It is generally agreed that the poster is a brief introduction to a certain highlight of the paper or new development in the direction of the field. So we put ORAL and POSTER separately would be a good way to divide and conquer this problem?