ICDL is a multidisciplinary conference pertaining to all subjects related to the development and learning process of natural and artificial systems including, but not limited to, artificial intelligence, psychology, neuroscience, and robotics.
This conference series has a visionary goal --- to understand autonomous development in human and higher animals simultaneously in biological, functional, and computational terms, and to enable such development in artificial systems. This conference series has an open-mind policy to foster advances toward reaching this challenging goal.
It is important to keep in mind that the ICDL conference is unique, in comparison with other existing conferences that cover intelligence related subjects. Some conferences focus on human development, with little consideration of biology or computation. Others focus on robotics, and do not consider natural, biological systems, much less their development. Some others focus on the biology of brain development, but without much consideration of how brain development leads to emergence of autonomous, intelligent behavior. Additionally, some conferences take a computational approach to human development, but do not consider the biological mechanisms. Finally, others consider the neural mechanisms of intelligence or the evolution of intelligence from a computational point of view, , without considering the development.
The goal of ICDL is to foster research that integrates all of the above approaches. That is, we foster progressive integration of multiple causalities: from human behavior causality, to computational causality, to brain causality, to developmental causality. Work of this integrative nature represents what is unique about the ICDL conferences, and it is also especially challenging to address. However, all work that is related to the general subjects of development and learning in natural and artificial systems falls into the scope of this conference. Because of the special challenges facing integrative work, care should be taken in formulating review committees and acceptance policies to ensure that reviewers sympathetic to the integrative goals of the conference are included, and to ensure that the special challenges confronting work of this type will be taken into account in the review process. As a general principle, the basis of judgment of a submission should be state-of-art for work of its type. The level of rigor that is possible for some types of work may be different than what is possible for work of other, more established, types.
(a) General chairs and program chairs should represent both the "natural intelligence side," such as neuroscience and psychology, and the "artificial intelligence side," such as machine intelligence and robotics. The ICDL Governing Board oversees the diversity.
(b) The diversity of program committee members and reviewers should be promoted by the conference organizers.
(a) For some consistency of review standards, papers are reviewed by program committee members overseen by area chairs and program chairs, as explained in Section 7.
(b) For strongly divided outcome of the review process for a particular paper, consultation among the general chairs and program chairs should occur to determine how best to address the discrepancy. Concerns expressed by negative reviews will be given careful consideration, but our policy should be to avoid allowing a single negative review, especially if not fully justified by clear arguments, to over-ride enthusiasm by other reviewers.
(a) ICDL business meeting is jointly held by the ICDL Governing Board, IEEE AMD Technical Committee, and the conference organizing committee, during the ICDL conference. All the members of ICDL Governing Board, IEEE AMD TC members, and expended members of organizing committee are requested to attend the business meeting.
(b) The documents that need to be voted on at the ICDL business meeting need to be made available reasonably before the ICDL business meeting
(c) The meeting follows the Robert's Rules of Order.
For simplicity, and based on the types of methodologies that are typically employed, we often divide the contributing disciplines into two rough categories: "artificial" and "natural". While we realize that many members of our community span this continuum, this rough division is often helpful in maintaining an appropriate balance of the organizational structure.
The program chairs have responsibility to construct all aspects of the scientific program. This includes call-for-papers, web construction, paper submission and review, and program schedule.
The program chairs should keep the General Chairs informed regarding the progress of the scientific program, and get inputs from the General Chairs regarding special sessions, invited talks, award committee and conflict of interest, among others.
PC members should review the assigned papers themselves, and can occasionally solicit help from senior PhD students or collaborators but they are still responsible for the review quality. The primary Area Chair provides a summary review and makes accept/reject recommendation.
Program Chairs make the final decision. In case Area Chair's recommendation is not retained, a discussion must take place among the Area Chair and the Program Chairs, and if necessary, involving the General Chairs.
After a list of accepted papers has been generated, the Program Chairs will then make a decision on how each accepted paper will be presented: either as an oral presentation or as a poster presentation. This decision often reflects a combination of paper quality (as reflected in the reviews), novelty, and the expected size of the audience. For example, papers that are very high quality but will be of interest to only a small segment of the ICDL attendees will typically be presented as a poster. ICDL is a single-track conference.
This is a sample timeline of the review process, normalized to the day that full paper submissions are due.
| Day | Deadline |
|---|---|
| -24 | Special session proposals due |
| 0 | Full paper submissions due |
| 5 | Program Chairs should have papers assigned to Primary and Secondary Area Chairs |
| 10 | Area Chairs should have papers assigned to 3 or more PC members |
| 38 | Reviews due |
| 40 | Review sent to authors for rebuttals |
| 47 | Rebuttals due |
| 54 | Summaries and recommendations due from Area Chairs |
| 61 | Program Chairs decisions made |
| 63 | Notification of accept/reject for full paper submissions |
| 70 | Poster abstracts due |
| 77 | Notification of accept/reject for abstracts |
| 84 | Camera-ready papers due |
| 85 | Author early registration in order for their papers to be included in the program |
| 90 | Final program announced |
| 95 | Deadline for advance registration and hotel room blocks (may be adjusted to the hotel contract). Never agree to pay penalty for unoccupied rooms in the hotel contract. |
| 96 | Final version of paper proceedings (with all abstracts) and CD proceedings |
| 110 | Conference start |
Note that these deadlines leave relatively little time for some tasks, and should be taken as a latest-possible deadline. Care should also be taken to schedule both the conference and the submission deadlines so that they do not conflict with other deadlines that typically occur in the spring for related meetings (CogSci, AAAI, and IJCNN are particular conferences that often have close deadlines to ICDL.)
The web site of each ICDL conference should have a link to the ICDL history site, currently at http://www.cogsci.ucsd.edu/~triesch/icdl/
The program chairs also have the responsibility for appointing a selection committee for conference awards. The program chairs may or may not be part of this committee at their discretion (and within the bounds of conflict of interest).