A research poster must describe a novel contribution and show at least preliminary results to demonstrate the effectiveness of the proposed solution. The work does not need to be complete, but it should convince the jury that the approach has promise. Primary reasons research posters are rejected:
1. The submission materials did not convince the jury that there was anything new in the approach, either because the abstract did not clearly differentiate the work from existing work, or because there were no results or evaluation that demonstrated the potential of the approach.
2. The submission materials did not clearly convey both the problem and the proposed solution. Pictures and videos help a lot, but if the abstract does not adequately convey how the images or videos were made, then the poster is unlikely to be accepted.
Demonstration, Application, or Systems Posters
These are posters that describe how a particular demo, video, or image was made, or how a set of existing technologies was linked together to produce a system that achieves a specific goal. The specific technologies need not be new, but the entire system should support doing something that wasn't possible before. Posters of this type must clearly convey what the overall goal is, what the technologies are, how they fit together, why they were chosen, and how the final system meets that goal. Primary reasons posters of this type are rejected:
1. It is unclear what the proposed approach is trying to accomplish and why existing tools are not sufficient to accomplish that goal.
2. The submission materials do not clearly demonstrate that the desired goal was reached.
3. A poster is not an appropriate medium for the submission because a poster is just a static set of images and text. This usually applies to work that is best experienced live or in interactive situations, and which involves fairly complex hardware that can't easily be brought to a poster session.
Other reasons for rejection:
1. The submitted poster is just an image, such as a movie poster or piece of artwork.
2. The poster is an advertisement for a product (game, movie, device, etc.)
3. The poster just proposes an interesting problem or discussion area.
Jurors are asked to evaluate your submission using four criteria: Concept, Novelty, Interest, and Quality. The final submission score is based on a combination of these factors. For example, a submission that is high quality, has broad appeal, and contains something new is likely to be accepted, while a submission that is incremental, of interest to only a small number of people, and poorly written will probably be rejected.
How exceptional are the ideas, problems, solutions, aesthetics, etc. presented in this submission? How coherently does the submission convey its overall concept? Is the concept similar to existing ones, or does it stand out? This criterion is particularly applicable to submissions that put together existing technologies into a single product (for example, demos, animations, art pieces). Submissions of this type, where the individual technologies are not necessarily new but their combination is, are evaluated on both the final product and how well proposed technologies integrate to meet the desired goals. Many submissions in this area are rejected because they do what existing systems do, and they do not demonstrate that the proposed approach leads to better results.
How new and fresh is this work? Is it a new, ground-breaking approach to an old problem, or is it an existing approach with a slightly new twist? You must first demonstrate to the jury that your work is sufficiently different from existing approaches. Second, you should evaluate you work in the context of other approaches where appropriate: Is it faster? Easier to use? Does it give better results? Is it more accurate? Many submissions are rejected either because the work is too similar to existing work or because the submission materials did not convince the jury that the improvements were substantial enough.
Will conference attendees want to see this? Will it inspire them? Are the results or approach appealing to a broad audience? This is partly a measure of how broad the potential audience is and partly a measure of the overall clarity and novelty of the submission. A submission in a very niche area is more likely to be accepted if the results are exceptionally better than what exists already, or if the proposed solution might be applicable to other areas.
Quality, Craft, and Completeness
This is a measure of how well-written the abstract is and the quality of the supporting materials. The abstract must effectively communicate both the problem and the solution in enough detail and clarity that the jury can evaluate it. You must also convince the jury that your solution works. Many submissions are rejected because, while the problem and solution seemed interesting, the materials did not convince the jury that the solution had actually been implemented and evaluated. If your submission has an animation, simulation, or interactive component, then including a video is essential.