Full Paper Submission
1. Submission Instructions
Please carefully read through the authors' guidelines and make yourself familiar with the paper types. Authors are also asked to follow the formatting instructions. The review process will be double-blind, so please make sure that your submission does not reveal the authors' identities or affiliations. For full papers, the submission of an abstract by November 30, 2012 is mandatory. Completed papers are due on December 9, 2012. Abstracts and papers have to be submitted through the Precision Conference System (PCS). Please note that all deadlines are at 11:59pm (23:59) UTC/GMT [convert timezone].
- Carefully read the authors' guidelines and make sure you follow them when preparing your submission.
- Familiarize yourself with the different paper types and choose one for your paper. If multiple categories apply, select the one which best fits your paper.
- Follow the formatting instructions and use the LaTeX2e style. Your submission should not exceed the page limit (9 pages without references, 10 pages including reference) and it must not reveal the authors' identities.
- Submit your abstract to PCS until November 30, 2012. If you do not submit an abstract by this deadline, you will not be able to submit a paper. For the abstract submission, you need to fill out the parts about title, authors, paper type, abstract, and keywords in the form. The remaining fields (the document, additional material) only have to be submitted by the final deadline on December 9, 2012. Make sure that you select the correct paper type and choose appropriate keywords.
- Submit the full paper to PCS until December 9, 2012. Your submission has to be provided in PDF format and uploaded using the document field of the submission form. Any supplementary material has to be uploaded by this deadline as well using the additional files part of the form.
- For papers that have previously been reviewed for other venues and have been rejected or withdrawn, the authors can provide a cover letter describing the changes they have made to comply with reviewers' comments and requests. This procedure is strongly recommended and it is meant to improve the efficiency of the reviewing process but does not imply reviewer continuity. The cover letter has to be submitted as an 'Additional Material'.
In order to submit to EuroVis 2013, authors should prepare their submissions as a PDF file using the EuroVis 2013 LaTeX2e style (including a document class, a style file, a sample source file, and a corresponding PDF output file). Please make sure that an image embedded in your paper does not contain transparent pixels (i.e., an alpha channel of a transparent color), because this will lead to problems when the resulting PDF is displayed or printed.
Submissions can also include supplementary material such as videos or executable programs, up to a limit of 50MB for the entire submission, including the PDF file. We encourage the use of digital videos to support paper submissions, particularly if part of, or all of the work covers interactive techniques. Please use only the most common video codecs to maximize the chances that the reviewers can see it.
EuroVis 2013 full paper submissions will undergo a two-stage review process. The review process is double-blind meaning that submissions must not reveal the identity of the authors (see below). All full papers accepted to EuroVis 2013 appear in a special issue of Computer Graphics Forum, containing the conference proceedings, and will appear at the same time in the Eurographics digital library.
Note that for each full paper the submission of an abstract is mandatory by November 30, 2012, with completed papers due on December 9, 2012. All submissions must be original works that have not been published previously in any conference proceedings, magazine, journal, or edited book. Concurrent submissions are strictly forbidden. If it is determined that a manuscript is simultaneously under the consideration by another publication venue, the manuscript will be immediately rejected.
Full papers will undergo a revision and review cycle after initial notification of review results in order to ensure they are acceptable for publication and presentation in the journal. At least one author of an accepted paper must attend the conference to present the work, and authors will also be required to present a brief one-minute summary of their talk at the opening papers preview session.
We expect that the submissions will clearly discuss the novel and significant contributions as well as place them in the context of prior art in the field. Authors should highlight how their contributions differ from previous work and advance the state of the art in visualization. Among the venues for important prior art are journals such as Computer Graphics Forum and IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics as well as conferences like EuroVis, Vis, InfoVis, VAST, and PacificVis.
EuroVis 2013 will use a double-blind review process for the first review cycle. Author identities will be hidden from the external reviewers. Authors should therefore not include their name or institution on the cover page of the initial submission, and should make an effort to ensure that there is no self-revealing information in the text. However, you will still need to provide a complete list of authors when submitting your abstract so that members of the program committee can avoid conflicts of interest during reviewer assignment. All authors must be specified in the submission system (but not in the paper) at the time of the submission. Adding additional authors after the acceptance of a paper is not acceptable.
Authors should cite all relevant previous work and clearly explain the differences between it and their paper, including their own previous work. Authors should do this in a way that does not reveal which references are part of their own work. For example, do not write "In our previous work on foobar  ... " and then have " Removed for blind review" for the citation. Instead, discuss the work in the third person: "We build on the previous work of Smith et al.  ... " and include the full reference details. If it is impossible to do so, for instance because the work is submitted or in press but not yet publicly available, then include an anonymized version of the relevant document(s) with your submission as supplemental material. Authors should not include an acknowledgments section in the submission, nor should they post their submitted manuscript on the web before the notification date of the first review cycle.
Our conference will adhere to the following ethics guidelines for reviewers, which can be found here:
EuroVis solicits novel ideas in a broad range of visualization research topics and approaches, including such that address spatial data and related techniques (scientific visualization), as well as visualization of non-spatial data and related techniques (information visualization), and visual analytics. Authors are asked to assign their paper to one of the five paper types: algorithm/technique, application/design study, evaluation, theory/model, and system.
We discuss these categories below as a guide to authors and reviewers. While papers can include elements of more than one of these categories, we ask authors to specify the most appropriate single choice in the submission process. Please see the paper Process and Pitfalls in Writing Information Visualization Research Papers by Tamara Munzner for a more detailed discussion on how to write a successful visualization paper that includes an extensive discussion on paper types. While these guidelines were written from the point of view of an InfoVis researcher, they apply more broadly to general visualization papers.
Algorithm/Technique papers introduce novel techniques or algorithms that have not previously appeared in the literature, or that significantly extend known techniques or algorithms, for example by scaling to datasets of much larger size than before or by generalizing a technique to a larger class of uses.
The technique or algorithm description provided in the paper should be complete enough that a competent graduate student in visualization could implement the work, and the authors should create a prototype implementation of the methods. Relevant previous work must be referenced, and the advantage of the new methods over it should be clearly demonstrated. There should be a discussion of the tasks and datasets for which this new method is appropriate, and its limitations. Evaluation through performance benchmarks, informal or formal user studies, or other methods will often serve to strengthen the paper.
Examples include: algorithms for isosurface extraction or rendering; data analysis techniques for visualization (such as transfer function design and interaction); topology- and geometry-based techniques for data exploration; algorithms for understanding of vector and tensor fields; interaction techniques for visualization; geometric or graphics algorithms for increased scalability of existing techniques; algorithms for layout and navigation of trees, graphs, and networks; browsing and navigation techniques in large information spaces; techniques for visualizing spaces of dozens or hundreds of dimensions. This list is not exhaustive, and we welcome submissions in these and all other areas of visualization and visual analytics.
Application/Design Study papers explore the choices made when applying visualization techniques in an application area to make the case that the proposed visual representation is the solution for a particular domain problem. The research contribution of a design study is not typically a new technique or a refinement of one, as in an Algorithm/Technique paper, but rather a well-reasoned justification of how existing techniques can be usefully combined. An implementation is expected, and deployment to target users strengthens the paper. A Design Study should include the requirements analysis for the particular problem, which may require a certain amount of background information about the domain. The visual encoding and interaction mechanisms should be clearly explained and justified in terms of how well they fulfill these requirements with respect to alternative possibilities. The validation of the Design Study paper may include case studies documenting insights found by target users in the application domain, formal or informal user studies, or lessons learned by the designers.
Examples include application areas such as the oil and gas industry, medical and biomedical analysis, simulation and fluid flow, mathematical visualization, bioinformatics, databases, finance, and computer-supported cooperative work. We invite submissions on any application area.
Evaluation papers explore the usage of visualization by human users, and typically present an empirical study of visualization techniques or systems. We solicit a wide range of studies and methodology: laboratory and field, quantitative and qualitative, short term and long term. Authors are not necessarily expected to implement the systems used in these studies themselves; the research contribution will be judged on the validity and importance of the experimental results as opposed to the novelty of the systems or techniques under study. The conference committee appreciates the difficulty and importance of designing and performing rigorous experiments, including the definition of appropriate hypotheses, tasks, data sets, selection of subjects, measurement, validation and conclusions. We do suggest that potential authors who have not had formal training in the design of experiments involving human subjects may wish to partner with a colleague from an area such as psychology or human-computer interaction who has experience with designing rigorous experimental protocols and statistical analysis of the resulting data, or from anthropology or human-computer interaction who has experience with ethnographic analysis and qualitative observational methods.
Examples include evaluation metrics for image quality, empirical comparisons of user performance with different visual representations or visualization systems, field studies and usability analyses of visualization designs, and the identification and testing of new evaluation metrics and methods.
Theory/Model papers present new interpretations of the foundational theory of visualization. Implementations are usually not relevant for papers in this category. Papers should focus on basic advancement in our understanding of how visualization techniques complement and exploit properties of human vision and cognition.
Examples include the treatment of the rendering integral, visualization taxonomies, task taxonomies, cognitive models, color models, extensions to Bertin's theories of visual encoding, and models to measure the value of visualizations.
System papers focus on the architectural choices made in the design of a visualization infrastructure, framework, or toolkit. A system paper typically does not introduce new techniques or algorithms in the way that an Algorithm/Technique paper does. It also does not introduce a new design for an application that solves a specific problem, which would be better suited for the Design Study type. An implementation of the system is expected. The paper should include the rationale for significant design decisions, and the lessons learned from building the system and from observing its use. The system should be compared to documented, best-of-breed systems already in use, with specific discussion of how the described system differs from and is, in some significant respects, superior to those systems. For example, the described system may offer substantial advancements in the performance or usability of visualization systems, or novel capabilities. Every effort should be made to compare fairly given external factors such as advances in processor performance, memory sizes, or operating system features. For further suggestions, please review How (and How Not) to Write a Good Systems Paper by Roy Levin and David Redell and Empirical Methods in CS and AI by Toby Walsh.
Examples include visualization toolkit, library, and framework designs.
4. Camera-Ready Papers
We ask authors of accepted papers to submit their final papers no later than Friday, April 5, 2013 through the PCS at http://precisionconference.com/~vgtc/
To do so, please go to "submissions in progress". There, you can upload your final submission. Additionally, you may update your supplementary material. Make sure that you provide all required information in PCS.
Additionally, for each paper the authors need to fill in and sign the copyright form and send it to Eurographics publishing. This can be done by faxing it to the number on the form or by sending a scan as PDF to email@example.com.
For your camera-ready manuscript submission, please carefully verify that your paper is provided in the correct format. Specifically, please closely check that your paper adheres to all of the following points:
- Make sure that you use the latest LaTeX template with the correct page headings, etc. Please compare to the sample PDF to verify the correct appearance of your paper.
- The type setting of your paper needs to closely follow the guidelines in the template. You must use the camera-ready format, i.e., with authors and acknowledgments included, etc. (your final version, for example, should not include any page numbers). The template contains two formats and you need to use EGauthorGuidelines-eurovis13-fin.tex (not EGauthorGuidelines-eurovis13-sub.tex) for generating the final version.
- All fonts should be embedded within the final paper PDF (this is a requirement of the publisher).
- Make sure that the images that you include are not downsampled, but in high resolution (otherwise, their reproduction in the printed journal issue will not be high quality).
- The publisher remarks that it would be good to have the included images in the CMYK color model.
- No paper can have anything else than references on the 10th page (if a 10th page is used at all). This length restriction is absolute and no exception from this rule is possible.