Indexing of NLP conferences

[Mustafa I Jarrar]

Dear all,

I’ve been getting questions about the Scopus indexing of major NLP conferences (ACL, EMNLP, EACL, NAACL, LREC, COLING, ArabicNLP, etc.). 

I want to share that, as far as I know, ACL, COLING, and LREC are indexed in Scopus.

Does anyone have up-to-date information about the others? 

Best Regards,

--Mustafa

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The information contained in this communication is intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom it is addressed and others authorized to receive it. It may contain confidential or legally privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution or taking any action in reliance on the contents of this information is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by responding to this email and then delete it from your system. The University is neither liable for the proper and complete transmission of the information contained in this communication nor for any delay in its receipt.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

[Nizar Habash]

Hi Mustafa, all -- I have been aware of some efforts for some time to add these venues, but they seem to be facing many hurdles. I am not involved so I am not aware of details.

Of course,  in computer science and AI, Scopus source indexing is not a reliable measure of conference quality. Leading NLP venues such as EMNLP are widely recognized (for example, CORE A*) yet are not listed as Scopus “Sources,” even though their papers are indexed. For newer venues, such as the Arabic NLP conference, reasonable indicators include acceptance rates as publicized and Google Scholar Conference Rankings as the community continues to strengthen the venue.

I think the problem is with outdated institutional policies that should evolve to align with disciplinary standards and better support emerging researchers. This is true for many places around the world; but not for top-tier universities. Tenure and promotion policies that prioritize journals over highly selective conferences do not reflect the norms of our field. In NLP/AI today, major competitive conferences are archival, allow extended appendices, and often open access, with impact that frequently exceeds journals.

Thanks,

Nizar

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "SIGARAB: Special Interest Group on Arabic Natural Language Processing" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sigarab+u...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sigarab/PUZPR01MB5002B7DD23E1D33E9751CC21AE65A%40PUZPR01MB5002.apcprd01.prod.exchangelabs.com.

[Firoj Alam]

Thanks @M. Jarrar  for bringing this discussion. 

Totally agree with @Nizar Habash "the problem is with outdated institutional policies that should evolve to align with disciplinary standards and better support emerging researchers." I personally needed to respond to it many times in project meetings etc. that many conference papers are high competitive and impactful than many Q1 journals. We may have to raise this awareness to update institutional policies and we may have to live with it till this happens. 

Regards
Firoj

................
Firoj Alam, PhD
https://firojalam.one

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sigarab/CAFfBGVk-infoAq69u%3D7NqiY8MPva6DVgxrDeS7vhAjMPnYfTKA%40mail.gmail.com.