Merge pull request #952 from alexsb/patch-1

Update area-model.md

governance/area-model.md

@@ -36,7 +36,8 @@ Each IEEE VIS paper will be assigned two members from the program committee as w
 The use of data visualization can be traced back to at least a millennium ago. The emergence of a variety of graphical plots in the 1800s introduced statistical graphics as a sub-area of statistics. The 1987 NSF report entitled “Visualization in Scientific Computing” prepared for the first IEEE Visualization Conference in 1990. Since then, visualization has become a scientific field, and has expanded to encompass several significant focal points, namely scientific visualization, information visualization and visual analytics as well as many domain-specific areas, such as geo-information visualization, biological data visualization, software visualization, and others. This event series has provided the field of visualization with a prestigious and broad international platform. The early unification effort resulted in the changes of its name to IEEE VisWeek in 2008 and IEEE VIS in 2013. In 2018, the VIS community started a reconstruction process to address the needs for unification and cohesion while maintaining its vibrancy and growth. The area model described here is the result of this reconstruction process.
 
 Visualization (or VIS) is the study of the transformation of data to visual representations, which provide cost-effective means for supporting a variety of data intelligence tasks, ranging from rapid observation to in-depth analysis and from model development to information dissemination. Data Science is a new scientific discipline that studies human and machine processes for transforming data to decisions and/or knowledge. Its main goal is to understand the inner workings of different data intelligence processes, such as statistical inference, algorithmic reasoning, data visualization, human thinking, and collaborative decision making, and to provide a scientific foundation to underpin the design, engineering, and optimization of data intelligence workflows composed of human and machine processes. Visualization is one of the core fields in this overarching discipline, and every area in Visualization is thus also an area of Data Science.
-Description of VIS Areas
+
+## Description of VIS Areas
 
 ### Area 1 – Theoretical & Empirical
 This area focuses on theoretical and empirical research topics that aim to establish the foundation of VIS as a scientific subject. As such, work submitted to this area may also relate closely to the topics covered in other areas. Work submitted to this area should contribute either theoretical or empirical research. 
@@ -79,9 +80,9 @@ Topics of interest include:
 
 
 **Example Papers:**
-   * Application Domains (example 1): F. Beck, S. Koch and D. Weiskopf. “Visual Analysis and Dissemination of Scientific Literature Collections with SurVis”, IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics, 22(1):180-189, 2016. doi: 10.1109/TVCG.2015.2467757
-   * Application Domains (example 2): C. Nobre, N. Gehlenborg, H. Coon and A. Lex. “Lineage: Visualizing multivariate clinical data in genealogy graphs”, IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics, 25(3):1543-1558, 2018. doi: 10.1109/TVCG.2018.2811488
-   * Application Domains (example 3): S. Dutta, C.-M. Chen, G. Heinlein, H.-W. Shen and J.-P. Chen. “In Situ Distribution Guided Analysis and Visualization of Transonic Jet Engine Simulations”, IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics, 23(1):811-820, 2016. doi: 10.1109/TVCG.2016.2598604
+   * Application Domains: F. Beck, S. Koch and D. Weiskopf. “Visual Analysis and Dissemination of Scientific Literature Collections with SurVis”, IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics, 22(1):180-189, 2016. doi: 10.1109/TVCG.2015.2467757
+   * Application Domains: C. Nobre, N. Gehlenborg, H. Coon and A. Lex. “Lineage: Visualizing multivariate clinical data in genealogy graphs”, IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics, 25(3):1543-1558, 2018. doi: 10.1109/TVCG.2018.2811488
+   * Application Domains: S. Dutta, C.-M. Chen, G. Heinlein, H.-W. Shen and J.-P. Chen. “In Situ Distribution Guided Analysis and Visualization of Transonic Jet Engine Simulations”, IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics, 23(1):811-820, 2016. doi: 10.1109/TVCG.2016.2598604
    * Application-specific Technical Solutions: F. Lekschas, B. Bach, P. Kerpedjiev, N. Gehlenborg, H. Pfister. “HiPiler: Visual Exploration of Large Genome Interaction Matrices with Interactive Small Multiples”, IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics, 24(1):522-531, 2017. doi: 10.1109/TVCG.2017.2745978
    * Application-specific Technical Solutions: K. Bladin et al., "Globe Browsing: Contextualized Spatio-Temporal Planetary Surface Visualization," IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics, 24(1): 802-811, 2018. [SciVis 2017 Best Paper Award]doi: 10.1109/TVCG.2017.2743958
    * Insight Documentation: G. A. Marai. “Activity-Centered Domain Characterization for Problem-Driven Scientific Visualization”, IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics, 24(1):913-922. doi: 10.1109/TVCG.2017.2744459
@@ -227,7 +228,7 @@ Areas are only an administrative division in the reviewing process. Areas will n
 1. **How do VIS areas differ from areas/subcommittees in other conferences?** <br>
 Compared to ACM CHI’s subcommittees, IEEE VIS has no area-specific program committee. Also, at VIS acceptance is recommended by the area paper chairs and confirmed by the overall paper chairs. At CHI, the area-specific program committee makes a joint decision in the program committee meeting. 
 1. **Some areas don’t seem as coherent as others. Is that true?** <br>
-For some areas, the main subject has enjoyed more structured development over the years and has established a set of relatively well-defined topics. In other cases, an area encompasses a few topics that could potentially become separate areas in the future when the research activities on these topics have reached a certain scale. The area model is expected to evolve in response to the emergence of new topics and the rapid development of some existing topics. 
+For some areas, the main subject has enjoyed more structured development over the years and has established a set of relatively well-defined topics. In other cases, an area encompasses a few topics that could potentially become separate areas in the future when the research activities on these topics have reached a certain scale. The area model is expected to evolve in response to the emergence of new topics and the rapid development of some existing topics. This change will be managed by a dedicated area curation committe (review the restructuring proposal and future governance documentation for details). 
 1. **Which areas will have the best acceptance rates?** <br>
 All areas have the same target acceptance rates, but slight variations in individual years may occur, as the final decision on acceptance is made by the overall program chairs, who ensure consistent quality and a balanced program.
 1. **Whom should I contact if I have a question on a specific area?** <br>
@@ -236,7 +237,8 @@ Please contact the area chairs of that specific area.
 It may appear unusual that APCs cannot submit to their own area (“self-submission”), given that strong expertise in exactly their area is one of the reasons they are appointed. reVISe considered many alternatives, but ultimately proposed this model for the following reasons:
     * Without self-submissions, avoiding conflicts of interest and leaks of information about the review process at the chair level becomes a realistic goal. As APCs do not have access to information about other areas’ papers, they cannot inadvertently learn about the reviews and reviewers of their own papers, and are completely removed from the decision process happening in other areas that involve their own papers. Avoiding conflicts of interest and potential sources for deanonymization increase the trust that authors have in the review process overall.
     * The unified program committee allows the selection of expert reviewers, supported by the new keyword mechanisms, independently of the area a paper is submitted in. Furthermore, in the analysis of the area model during its development, it became apparent that many papers fit well in several areas. Hence, for the vast majority of cases, not allowing self-submission will not compromise the quality of reviewing, and avoids more drastic restrictions, such as disallowing APC submissions completely. 
-    * In some cases, an APC paper will not fit well into another area. However, experience with journal editors shows that a managing editor does not have to be an expert in an area, as long as they can rely on a pool of a qualified reviewers, which is ensured by the unified PC. However, experience with journal editors shows that a managing editor does not have to be an expert in an area, as long as they can rely on a pool of a qualified reviewers, which is ensured by the unified PC. The choice to block APCs from submitting was balanced against other considered solutions such as involving additional shadow paper chairs or chairs from other areas to help out in cases of conflict. The current solution is the one that involves the least chances to reveal anonymous information and the one that is administratively the most simple solution. Hence, the approach taken balances potential unpleasantness with process simplicity and transparency.
-   * Finally, the choice to block APCs from submitting to their own area is not one that goes against scientific practices elsewhere where the paper chair positions are considered an honor taken on by senior community members who are in a position in their scientific careers at which they can give priority to service to the community. It is, therefore, not unusual in other communities to entirely disallow submissions of chairs overseeing a papers process (all SIGPLAN conferences, including POPL, and PLDI prohibit submissions by general and paper chairs, manyt theory conferences (STOC/FOCS/SODA/SOCG/ICALP/ESA) also prohibit submissions by PC members). The model at VIS offers a compromise between striving for reviewing integrity and allowing APCs to still contribute to the scientific content of the conference. 
+    * In some cases, an APC paper will not fit well into another area. However, experience with journal editors shows that a managing editor does not have to be an expert in an area, as long as they can rely on a pool of a qualified reviewers, which is ensured by the unified PC. The choice to block APCs from submitting was balanced against other considered solutions such as involving additional shadow paper chairs or chairs from other areas to help out in cases of conflict. The current solution is the one that involves the least chances to reveal anonymous information and the one that is administratively the most simple solution. Hence, the approach taken balances potential unpleasantness with process simplicity and transparency.
+   * Finally, the choice to block APCs from submitting to their own area is consistent with practices in other conferences.  Paper chair positions are considered an honor taken on by senior community members.  Many who fill these roles are in a position in their scientific careers at which they can give priority to service to the community, yet they still are actively involved in scientific research and publication. It is not unusual in other communities to entirely disallow submissions of chairs overseeing a papers process (for example, all SIGPLAN conferences, including POPL, and PLDI; theory conferences such as STOC, FOCS, SODA, SOCG, ICALP, ESA). The model at VIS offers a compromise between striving for reviewing quality and integrity and  allowing APCs to still contribute to the scientific content of the conference.
+
 
 As all other aspects of the area model, this will be closely watched by ACC, and alternatives will be considered if the need arises.