Call for Proposals - CLOSED
The 2017 MICCAI conference will be held in Quebec City, Canada. The conference will host a variety of workshops, challenges and tutorials, commonly known as “Satellite events”. Satellite events have become essential components of the MICCAI Society conference, particularly as the field has been growing and expanding into a diverse set of areas. These events attract a large number of participants, offering opportunities for organizers to emphasize various disciplines as well as highlight the work performed by a greater number of authors.
The satellite events will take place on Sunday, September 10th, 2017 and on Thursday, September 14th, 2017. Each event may be organized as a half-day (8:00am-12:30, or 1:30pm-5:00pm) or full-day (8:00am-5:00pm). All events will be held at the main conference venue, the Quebec City Convention Center. Rooms assigned to each event will be listed on this page.
The deadline for proposal submissions is January 16th, 2017, with first round decisions announced on the February 10th, 2017. Proposals for all satellite events will be evaluated based on a number of criteria including the expected number of participants and/or the complementarity of the topics addressed. The submission details and criteria for selection are outlined below. The proposals for all satellite events must follow the format mentioned below, and be submitted as a single PDF file by email to firstname.lastname@example.org.
Organizers of the accepted proposals are required to administer an independent website, manage the paper submission process (where relevant), organize an evaluation process independently (in accordance with the outlined procedures), disseminate acceptance results, and prepare soft-copy proceedings (where relevant). If on time and within guidelines, the MICCAI 2017 Satellite events organization committee can receive the soft-copies of the papers related to each Satellite event (in PDF format) for distribution to the registered participants.
The purpose of workshops is to provide a comprehensive forum on open topics that have not been fully explored in the main conference, thereby assisting in creating sub-communities within the field. Workshops that are too general and cover a wide variety of topics covered by the main conference will be asked to narrow their scope. Proposals in emerging and translational fields that would help widen the scope of MICCAI society and expand its base are of particular interest. A workshop may include a number of guests/invited speakers, but must include original research papers. The workshop format is a single stream of oral presentations or a panel that allows significant time for questions and discussion with an optional parallel poster session. Papers accepted for the main conference may not be submitted to any workshop. No papers may be submitted to multiple workshops.
Tutorials are educational sessions offered by leading researchers/scientists, on topics relevant to the community with known methods, approaches and open/unsolved problems. They are expected to offer an extensive and up-to-date coverage of their fields from a methodology and/or application oriented point of view. The target audience include professionals seeking continued education, students, clinicians, early career scientists and established researchers planning to broaden their research horizons. There should be a cohesive theme to a tutorial, e.g. methodology, organ, disease, software tool, etc. The tutorial format is a set of lectures and potential hands-on sessions. Tutorial organizers are encouraged to share all material with the community after the event.
Challenges play an increasingly important role at MICCAI while their effects are felt long after the conference. This year, formal submission guidelines are provided in order to ensure that challenges are designed fairly, enable a direct comparison of different methodological solutions to important research problems of clinical relevance, and employ correct scientific measures of success. In addition, the challenges are required to have a well-defined problem, provide high quality data for testing/training algorithms and define a clear evaluation procedure. Examples of topics from previous challenges include: segmentation/registration, computer aided annotation, endoscopic vision, brain connectivity, and machine learning. The sessions may be designed as oral/poster presentations of the results each participant achieved prior to the conference and/or hands-on competitions during the event. MICCAI supports open data, hence, we encourage the organizers to use open source data licenses and/or keep the challenge open to submissions beyond the conference, providing a sustained platform for benchmarking.
This year, the submission process will be formalized in order to ensure uniformity. Satellite organizers must complete the submission forms found below:
Note: If a workshop involves a challenge, proposals must be submitted for both components as each will be evaluated independently
Due to the limited number of rooms available, and in order maintain relevance to the conference participants, a selection will be performed within the submitted workshops, tutorials and challenges. The specific selection criteria are included in the proposal forms. Examples of the criteria are:
Expected interest of the topic for MICCAI audience. Emergent subjects will be favorably considered if the link with the MICCAI community is clearly established.
Quality of the organization planned for the review process in workshops, the speaker selection in tutorials, and the challenge organization in terms of the data provided, and evaluation of results.
To ensure a rich and diverse program, we reserve the right to ask satellite events with substantial overlap to merge or alter their scope.
The process to evaluate challenges has been formalized this year. Proposals will be reviewed by three reviewers, who will evaluate the proposal, provide feedback and assist organizers in making a final decision. These reviewers will be chosen based on their expertise in the area, where at least one of the reviewers will have appropriate clinical expertise in the topic, where relevant.