In computer science, the number of submissions to conferences has been increasing steadily over the past few years. There are many hypotheses attempting to explain this phenomenon, and as they are all completely unvalidated by real data, I will spare you the details.
However, in a pioneering and breathtakingly original piece of work, Cormode, Czumaj and Muthukrishnan have proposed a number of solutions to the problem of conference submission glut, as well as the problem of articially lowered conference acceptance ratios. The abstract:
In the beginning was the pub. This work was triggered by a pub conversation where the
authors observed that many resumes list acceptance ratios of conferences where their
papers appear, boasting the low acceptance ratio. The lower the ratio, better your paper
looks. The list might look equally impressive if one listed the rejection ratio of
conferences where ones paper was submitted and rejected. We decided to lampoon
rather than lament the effort the PC typically put in: wouldn’t the world be better if we
could encourage only high quality submissions and so run top conferences with very
high acceptance ratios? This paper captures our thoughts, and it is best consumed in a
pub (and in color).