
Every "best paper" from Computer Science conferences since 1996 - whathappenedto
http://jeffhuang.com/best_paper_awards.html
======
yurylifshits
Btw, this is one of the areas where Yahoo! has a lot of success. Yahoo!
Research in its current form exists for around 5 years, but it has already
surpassed MIT.

~~~
gnosis
According to what metric?

~~~
mahmud
Here is at least one metric. In that link, scroll down to the bottom. Yahoo
Research has 7.6 "points" while MIT has 5.8.

Lifshits is a research scientist at Y!R.

~~~
ra
This is a very limited metric. By the same vein Microsoft is the best of the
best.

~~~
sp332
Not Microsoft, it's Microsoft Research. They probably are the best of the
best. The cameras and firmware for the Kinect were made there, for example.
<http://research.microsoft.com/>

------
sb
Thanks for the link, I really like the site. However, my interests are more in
the area of programming languages (PLDI, POPL, OOPSLA, etc.). Does anybody
know of something similar for ACM SIGPLAN conferences? (I know they hand out
"most influential" awards after 10 years consideration time, but "best papers"
in general for many conferences should give a pretty good picture of the state
of any field over time...)

~~~
mahmud
What is your specialization? I can send some survey papers your way. (I
already tweet them as I find them.)

I go through 2-10 papers a day, nearly on PL research, semantics, type-theory
and implementation lore. There are a bunch of us on HN, some I correspond with
via email, others twitter.

~~~
sb
Hi, PL reserach in general is my cup of tea, too. I find the idea of a "best
paper" catalogue for conferences in the PLDI-area in general very appealing;
similar to the site the OP posted. Since you mention that we're not alone, we
should probably pool our resources, what do you think? (Probably host a site
somewhere...)

EDIT: 2-10 papers a day is an _awesome_ rate!

~~~
mahmud
Hey, we're not "alone". Just check out the people I follow on twitter.

There is a huge community of PL enthusiasts.

We can setup a site, but the field is too diverse. Right now it mostly makes
sense as each of use tweeting a summary of a paper :-)

------
gnosis
It's interesting to compare this list to Citeseer's "Most Cited Computer
Science Articles":

<http://ksuseer1.ist.psu.edu/stats/articles>

------
mathgladiator
These are going directly on the kindle; thank you.

------
chanux
Did anyone notice that Microsoft tops the _Institutions and best papers_ table
while Google is the last?. (And Yahoo is #9)

~~~
St-Clock
1\. This is a very limited subset of conferences/fields. 2\. Google Research
is younger than Microsoft Research. 3\. Google Research is really mixed with
their product development whereas Microsoft (and IBM) Research are more
isolated so they can focus on fundamental research and publications (there is
some transfer...). A Google representative once said in a software engineering
conference: "Come work at Google Research, you'll work on real and interesting
research problems like GMail". Gmail==Research? Really?

~~~
zerokyuu
I don't know if GMail itself is "research", but I'm sure there is definitely a
lot of systems research going on behind the scenes. I don't know that they use
it for GMail, but the Google File System paper was interesting. Allowing their
users (millions?) to quickly search their email (tens to hundreds of
thousands?) must have some interesting networking/distributed systems research
questions.

That said, some more publications/insight on those systems would be nice to
see.

------
shadowpwner
This is great! However, if I click on the 2010 one (edit:any), I get to a
"purchase this article". Is this what's expected?

~~~
gnosis
Try searching CiteSeerX:

<http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/>

A google search of the site is sometimes more productive. For instance:

[http://www.google.com/#hl=en&q=site%3Ahttp%3A%2F%2Fcites...](http://www.google.com/#hl=en&q=site%3Ahttp%3A%2F%2Fciteseerx.ist.psu.edu+%22ir+evaluation+methods%22)

~~~
Technophilis
or <http://scholar.google.com> and make use of "All x versions" there's
usually a pdf version among them.

~~~
whathappenedto
I find this is really the best way. It also finds papers authors post on their
websites which has been becoming extremely common (kind of like self-
publishing)

~~~
gnosis
Personally, I much prefer searching citeseer, as most of the papers I've found
through google scholar are behind paywalls, while virtually every paper on
citeseer is free.

If I can't find a paper through citesser, I usually just do a regular google
search, and often find the paper elsewhere on the web. Google scholar is
pretty much my last resort, and I really haven't had much luck finding freely
downloadable papers through it.

------
dododo
the title is wrong. it's not every "best paper": notably all best papers
before 2005 are missing for ICML.

in terms of metrics of research quality, not all conferences are equal, and
"best" papers are often selected by a relatively small group of people whose
decision isn't really validated too much.

~~~
whathappenedto
sorry, it seemed to cover most of the conferences I knew about. where would
one start looking for something like older best paper awards? it seems like
ICML only started giving out best paper awards since 2005

I guess it's the old truism of not being able to prove something does not
exist

~~~
dododo
you can find the previous icml best paper awards by looking at the previous
conference websites. for example:

<http://www-ai.ijs.si/SasoDzeroski/ICML99/award.html> via
<http://www.machinelearning.org/icml.html>

in machine learning, i think the significant conferences are NIPS
(<http://www.nips.cc/>), ICML, UAI (e.g., <http://event.cwi.nl/uai2010/>), and
AISTATS (<http://www.aistats.org/>).

------
abhaga
Here is the link for best paper awards for 3 more conferences from NLP/CL
area:
[http://www.aclweb.org/aclwiki/index.php?title=Best_paper_awa...](http://www.aclweb.org/aclwiki/index.php?title=Best_paper_awards)
.

------
bigfoot
"Every best paper from CS conferences" does not really sound like what this
site does -- list best papers from _11_ CS conferences, a marginal fraction of
how many CS conferences are out there.

------
swannodette
Interesting, no category at all for Programming Languages.

------
schumihan
Why are there so many "best papers" on CHI 2010?

~~~
Technophilis
CHI is a huge conference. More than 1000 papers were submitted last year. A
designated committee chooses 1% of the submitted papers to receive the best
papers awards which explains the number of awarded papers.

~~~
whathappenedto
Having 2 or 3 best paper awards I can understand, but having a dozen is
cheating. Many of the other top conferences like WWW, AAAI, and SIGIR have
nearly 1,000 submissions also and they only have a single best paper award.

