1. What does this really mean, and is it the same as a major revision from conference to CGF?
This is usually a special arrangement between CGF and a conference (which may also be a symposium or a workshop). Such a special arrangement typically allows the conference IPC co-chairs to recommend a small number of “best” papers to be extended and then submitted to CGF. This is different from a major revision from a major partner conference (e.g., EG, EuroVis, EGSR, SGP, and PG) because CGF is not involved in overseeing the review process of such a conference and thus cannot treat it as the first review cycle.
The extended paper is considered as a new submission by CGF. The CGF reviewers will be made aware that some content of such a paper has already been published in a conference, and the requirement for at least 30% new contributions. Like all CGF new submissions, the decision options after the first CGF review cycle typically include <Accept>, <Minor Revision>, <Major Revision>, and <Reject>.
When an extended paper is received by CGF, the associate editor assigned will usually invite some or all of the original reviewers for the conference. The associate editor also has the freedom to appoint some new reviewers if he/she feels the necessity for covering some gaps in the collective expertise of the reviewers.
2. What does “at least 30% new contributions” mean?
The phrase “at least 30% new contribution” is a coarse guideline for both authors and reviewers. It is not uncommon that reviewers may interpret this differently from the authors. Our general observations are:
- The “new contributions” should feature technical novelty (e.g., studying the technical problems that were not addressed in the original paper), additional rigor (e.g., previously unpublished mathematical proof, new empirical studies to evaluating the technique reported), or significant application case study.
- The quantity “30%” is not intended to imply the page length of the new materials, though the balance between “new materials” and “old materials” in terms of page length may still influence the reviewers’ perception about the paper.
- Some extended papers, which did not pass the review process successfully, were typically considered by the reviewers as lack of “new technical contributions” in the extended part. For example, some of such unsuccessful extensions have included only extra computational results of applying the same algorithm to different objects resulting in new testing images, tables of results, and discussions on the results.
3. My original paper is already quite long. Adding 30% would make it longer than the page length recommended by CGF. Will this be OK?
CGF does not impose strict maximum lengths for submitted papers. For a typical CGF submission, it is recommended that research papers be up to 10 pages (in CGF latex style including all images but excluding references), and survey papers be up to 20 pages (excluding references). Papers should only be as long as their content would justify. Reviewers might rate a submission lower if it is perceived as being unnecessarily long. Authors are encouraged to use supplementary documents to provide extra contents. When a paper is extended, it is expected to be slightly longer. Meanwhile, authors can usually remove some materials (without affecting self-containment) by citing the corresponding conference publication, or moving some materials to an appendix. Nevertheless, it is up to the authors to judge the “goodness” of any of such changes, and up to the reviewers to judge the quality of the whole paper after the extension.
4. Where do I submit the extended paper, and what do I need to submit?
The extended paper must be submitted directly to CGF by choosing “Submit a Mansucript at the CGF website.
On the first submission page, such a paper should be submitted with the type “Invited Article“. The submission system will assign an ID to the paper in the form of <CGF-17-IA-187>, where the conference is not identified explicitly. Because the CGF submission system usually differs from what the system used by the conference, we appreciate very much the extra effort by the authors and reviewers. In addition to the revised version of the paper (in PDF), it is important for authors to facilitate the reviewers’ access to the necessary information for the second review cycle.
- Please submit a revision report as an additional file (for review but not for publication) since the <Cover Letter> can only been seen by the editors-in-chief and the associate editor.
- Please also upload the original submission (to the conference) as a supplemental file since the reviewers usually will not be able to access it at the review system for the conference.
- Please upload the reviews of the original submission during the conference review cycle.
5. What is the deadline?
The deadline is usually set as a date three months after the notification date of the conference concerned. The papers (IPC) co-chairs of the conference normally adjust the date slightly to make it easy to remember. If the authors have any query about the date and other submission issues, please contact the editors-in-chief of CGF.
6. My original paper that received the best paper award is not quite a computer graphics paper. Can I still submit such an extended paper to CGF?
Some conferences that have this special arrangement with CGF cover a broader spectrum than CGF. Inevitably, some non-graphics papers (e.g., computer vision and image processing) may receive a best paper award or honourable mention. We understand fully that some authors may choose not to submit an extension to CGF. If some authors of such papers do decide to submit an extension to CGF, we recommend strongly for the authors to focus the extension on the technical contribution to computer graphics or its sub-fields (such as visualization, virtual reality, computer games, and so on). For example, one may add a significant case study to showcase the application of a image processing technique to computer graphics, or one may make critical use of visualization or visual analytics techniques to assist in model development in computer vision.
7. My paper was not recommended by the conference as one of its “best papers”. Can I still submit an extended paper to CGF?
8. My paper was in a conference that does not have a special arrangement with CGF. Can I still submit an extended paper to CGF?
The answer to this question is relatively complicated. For some special arrangements, CGF and the conferences concerned do not have any conflict about copyrighted materials. For example, an Eurographics workshop typically publishes its papers through EG Digital Library, and reusing parts of such a paper in a CGF paper will not cause a conflict in copyright. For some other arrangements, the conference organisers typically have obtained the permission for its best papers to be republished partly, and with appropriate extension, in CGF. In other words, the potential conflict in copyright has been resolved beforehand.
Our general recommendation is for authors to consider such a potential paper as a piece of novel research built on the existing work that has been published in the conference concerned. It is desirable for the authors to focus on the novel contributions in the intended extension, and make use of any part of the already-published work with particular care about copyright. Because such a submission is not an invited best paper, the reviewers typically weigh the originality, rigor, significance of the extended paper by comparing it with previous works including the paper before the extension and the authors’ other publications.
Please do not submit such a paper with the type “Invited Article“, which would usually cause some delays as CGF would try to contact the conference organisers to obtain the review details. Please use the type “Original Article“. The submission system will assign an ID to the paper in the form of <CGF-17-OA-201>.
9. I am organizing a conference. How do I make a special arrangement with CGF for selecting some best papers to be extended for CGF?
Please contact the editors-in-chief of CGF.