[Neuro-2008-committee] INCF congress abstract submission recap

[Erik De Schutter]

Dear all,

I am a bit unclear on who gets to review what...
Pontus, can you clearly link the workshop topics to the topic  
categories listed?  When I log in I receive 6 categories and that is  
way too many...
Also, who handles the general neuroinformatics (#1) and computational  
neuroscience (#2) categories?There is no way that I can score 72  
abstracts (#1+#2+#6) before the end of the week, which would be the  
case if I was required to also score those general categories.
Best regards,
Erik

On May 12, 2008, at 23:11 , Pontus Holm wrote:
> Dear program committee,
>
> Abstract submission is completed and it is time to focus on  
> reviewing and program planning.
>
> Abstract submission result recap:
> I am very happy to announce that we collected 130 abstracts! 104 for  
> posters and 26 for demos. We will make arrangements for hosting more  
> than the 10 demo slots originally planned. The added extra week  
> before deadline, and some late reminders, gave a substantial  
> increase of abstracts fromNetherlands and Sweden, as well as for the  
> “Electrophysiology” topic. It also gave us participation from two  
> more countries, France and Brazil.
>
> Abstracts distribution per country:
> <image001.gif>
> Abstracts distribution per topic:
> <image002.gif>
> As you can see, we attract scientists from a large number of  
> countries, but naturally INCF member states dominate. Regarding  
> topics, it is clear that the people of some categories have embraced  
> the neuroinformatics concept more than others. This places us in a  
> situation where the leaders of Workshop 1 (Erik and Anders) will  
> have a lot of abstracts to review, whereas other workshop leaders  
> will have considerably less. So, Erik and Anders, if you come across  
> abstracts that you think borders to another topic you may consider  
> changing its topic. Of course it goes for all of you that if you  
> think an abstract is in the wrong topic group, then just change its  
> topic.
>
> So now begins review phase 1 where we ask you to grade all the  
> abstracts of your topics 1-5, where 1 means not accepted and 5 means  
> strong candidate for oral presentation. At this stage you will be  
> able to grade and comment also the demo abstracts of your topics.  
> Please do this by Thursday or Friday so that we will have sufficient  
> time for review stage 2 (accepting, rejecting, allocating 5 minute  
> oral presentation slots).
>
> Cheers,
> Pontus
> PS. Due to a recently decided INCF task force workshop in  
> conjunction to the congress, there may be a few late abstract  
> additions from task force participants this week. /P
> --
> Pontus Holm, Ph.D.
> Program Officer
>
> International Neuroinformatics Coordinating Facility Secretariat
> Karolinska Institutet
> Nobels väg 15A
> SE-171 77 Stockholm
> Sweden
>
> Email: pontus.holm at incf.org
> Phone: +46 8 524 87016
> Fax: +46 8 524 87150
> web: www.incf.org
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Neuro-2008-committee mailing list
> Neuro-2008-committee at incf.org
> http://lists.incf.org/mailman/listinfo/neuro-2008-committee

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.incf.org/pipermail/neuro-2008-committee/attachments/20080513/a9dd5b27/attachment-0001.htm