Minutes of the RTA-2002 Business Meeting July 22-24, 2002, Copenhagen, Denmark -------------------------------------------------------------------------- (as recorded by Vincent van Oostrom) RTA 2002 general assembly minutes (# participants in general assembly approx. 50 varies a bit (5 people) over time) 1) report of 2002 program chair, Sophie Tison submission deadline 15 jan abstract, 27 jan final #abstracts 55 #submitted 49 paper type #submitted #accepted percentage regular 40 20 50 application 2 2 100 problem set 2 0 0 system descriptions 5 4 80 total 49 26 50 some figures on submissions country #submitted #accepted france 13 8 germany 8 4 japan 6 2 spain 4 2 netherlands 2 2 ... denmark 0 0 ! comparison of #submissions 2001 55 2000 44 1999 53 1998 61 1997 54 1996 84 1995 87 invited speakers: Baader Mitchell Shankar (special contribution) 4 workshops: HOR, UNIF, WRS, WG 1.6 2) report of 2002 conference chair, Thomas Arts type #participants regular 56 student 14 country #participants france 24 usa 9 germany 8 netherlands 6 spain 5 japan 5 income approx 24000 euro type expenses invited speakers 6500 van hauen conference bureau 6000 lunch,dinner 8000 printing + proceedings 2750 DIKU cleaning 300 total 23550 affiliated workshop participants UNIF 31 WRS 23 (in parallel with HOR) HOR 15 (in parallel with WRS) WG 1.6 14 (?) EU grants: 78 applications (FloC) of which 8 for RTA of which 7 registered for RTA Discussions: 1) Thomas: prices a) #participants low because LICS is cheaper (to register) because larger. drawback of participating in FLoC b) conference bureau is expensive (100 euro pp) advice - conference fees of parallel conferences should be the same or smaller conference should be lower (less work) 2) Thomas: local organiser experience a) local organiser living abroad makes no sense (Thomas in Sweden, Floc in Denmark) b) local organiser does not do anything within FLoC since structure of FLoC is quite strict examples of this: i) price of workshops according to FloC rules ii) sponsor-money distributed over FLoC conferences according to #participants (RTA 7.5%) most of this money spent on general things 3) report RTA/RDP 2003 by Salvador Lucas, organising chair (Salvador Lucas also represented Robert Nieuwenhuis, program chair, who had not arrived yet) location: valencia type of event: joint meeting with TLCA, named RDP (Federated Conference on Rewriting, Deduction and Programming) organizers: ELP (Extensions of Logic Programming) group of UPV (Universidad Politecnica de Valencia) chair: Salvador Lucas workshops: Maria Alpuente location: city center (not in university) advantages: 1) no travelling from hotel 2) good conference facilities (using laptops, internet) 3) airconditioned date: 9 - 11 june travelling: valencia has airport overlap with other meetings: lics next (two weeks after) 4) proposal new steering committee member 2002 Femke van Raamsdonk (proposed by Jan Willem Klop) entry years of current members 2001 Franz Baader (Germany) Pierre Lescanne (France) Aart Middeldorp (Japan) 2000 Leo Bachmair (USA) Helene Kirchner (France) 1999 Jose Meseguer (USA) 5) proposal RTA 2004 program chair Vincent van Oostrom (proposed by steering committee after internal discussions on candidates) 6) proposal RTA 2004 conference site & chair, by Juergen Giesl site: Aachen (university) conference chair: Juergen Giesl - travelling: 4 airports nearby - dates possible (participants spporting date) 1) first half of april 2004 (support: 3) 2) first week of june 2004 (right after pentecost), (support: 50) 3) august 2004, (support: 4) so june accomodation: >40 hotels expenses: - free lecture halls (in city center) - funding from DFG - probably funding from companies discussion/question from audience: - Q: price of hotels A: 60 euro - Suggestion by J.-P. Jouannaud: Include saturday to cut travel expenses 7) proposal to remove item 11 from the bylaws discussion: franz Baader: remove to increase #papers past drawback (ethics in accepting) no longer holds because of electronic tools (which effectively hide all sensitive information in case of conflict of interest) hubert comon and jean-pierre jouannaud response: argument is independence, i.e. perception of the outside world. want to avoid the impression of a closed community. support from tobias nipkow: problem: it is outside perception of others whether everything is done ethically support from claude kirchner: history of bylaws is in spirit of jouannaud & comon question to check: who would not submit if bylaws change: 3 hands raised --------------------------- secret ballot to four proposals above : yes no 4) (femke) 43 2 5) (vincent) 45 1 6) (juergen) 45 1 7) (bylaw11) 8 35 8) proposals/discussions from the floor jouannaud advice: contact teamleaders to get more submissions nachum dershowitz observation: not much publicity for rta. more publicity should attract more attendants pierre lescanne response: do not want flooding aart middeldorp solution: target individuals, don't spam mailinglists. daniel dougherty question: not (much) more papers submitted, do we see papers at other conferences? no real answer to this question