ICAPS 2022 Doctoral Consortium

The ICAPS Doctoral Consortium (DC) is intended to provide Ph.D. students with the opportunity to interact closely with established researchers and to get feedback on their research, provide advice on career possibilities and build a professional network, improving the cohesion of new researchers with the ICAPS community.

The DC is open to all doctoral student attendees of the conference and will take place on Sunday, June 19th (the day before ICAPS workshops and tutorials). Attendance is free for everybody joining ICAPS, participation in the Mentoring Program requires registration with the organizers, see below.

If you want to help us organize the DC, please take part in this short survey

Mentoring Program

We encourage current doctoral students who are at least one year in their Ph.D., but also at least one year away from defense/completion to apply for the Mentoring Program.

The Mentoring Program is designed to provide Ph.D. students working in an area relevant to the ICAPS community with an opportunity for in-depth advice by senior members of the field regarding careers and research skills. Each student accepted to the program will be matched with an established researcher in the field who will assist the student with research and career management advice. Applicants are encouraged to provide their suggestions for fitting mentors, otherwise we make a selection based on topics / area of interests.

Application Procedure for the Mentoring Program

To participate in the Mentoring Program, an application is required.

Applicants for the Mentoring Program should submit the following separate PDFs:

  • Optional: Preferred Mentors. A list (ordered by preference) of potential/desired mentors. Although this is optional, we would really appreciate this, as that would make our life much easier! Applicants are also advised asking their supervisors and other senior researchers for possibilities, as they often know more people than young researchers or look from a different perspective. In case of a hybrid mode, not every potential supervisor might join in person, and in case of online mode, time zones might be an issue. So more names would be helpful. :)
  • Supervisor statement. A letter from the candidate's Ph.D. primary supervisor confirming the enrollment in the Ph.D. program. The general area or research question addressed in the thesis would be advised to be mentioned.
  • CV. We provide suggested headlines/content to make sure nothing important is missed. This information will be particularly useful for your mentor to advise on what to focus more (or less).
    • Academic Education and Appointments. In actual "applications" that usually divided into two separate sections. Here it doesn't really matter, probably.
    • Honours, Honourable Mentions, and Awards.
    • Additional Qualifications. This may include (mentioning) certificates related to teaching, soft skills, etc.
    • Reviewing. SPC/PC memberships, Reviews.
    • Further Services. Conference, Workshop organization and the like. Session chairing. Basically any other service that deserves mentioning like serving on University boards or organizing events for pupils etc.
    • List of publications. If you use LaTeX (which we strongly encourage you to!), please make sure to use adequate bibtex types and provide all important information (like publication venue, which is normally reflected in the book title).
    • Teaching. Did you support courses (via tutoring, exercise or exam creation etc.), or even deliver some lectures?
    • Student supervision. Did you supervise any students? Most importantly, did you supervise Bachelor or Master theses? It might be worth mentioning if any of these resulted in a publication. (But any supervision should be mentioned, including supervision of seminar students.)
    Note that depending on how junior/senior you are, and clearly depending on your personal circumstances like academic environment and contract etc., some (or even most) of these categories might be empty or almost empty. Do not be discouraged by this, that is more than normal! Including them in this mentoring context anyway still seems like a good idea so that your mentor can provide a more holistic feedback.
  • Dissertation abstract. A dissertation abstract (in AAAI style) of at most 4+1 pages, where the additional page may only contain references (so that related work can be sufficiently positioned). The paper should in general adhere and follow the standard "structure" of top-tier conference papers, though it will of course be much less technical as it is not supposed to make technical contributions but only lay out the investigated research questions (for which of course a certain level of detail might be required); what has been done so far and what's still planned until the completion of the thesis? We will publish a proceedings after the DC, in which we will include all accepted DC dissertation abstracts -- as long as the respective Ph.D. students agree with this. If there are any concerns (e.g., since open research questions are being mentioned), we are happy to exclude individual abstracts, though we hope that all can be included. Whereas the list of authors is decided by the authors, we propose to have just a single author, which is the Ph.D. student. In such a case we strongly encourage to add the supervisor or supervisory team into the block of affiliations.
  • Optional: One publication. A single representative/exemplary publication to which the applicant has contributed significantly (first-author preferred). Select whatever you believe will be most helpful for you and your mentor for upcoming discussions.
  • Additional Information. A single letter containing two pieces of information:
    • Required: (a) Do you know already that you will participate online, or are you also considering joining in person if the event is going to be done hybrid? (b) Please provide your country and UMT time zone at the time during ICAPS (mind summer vs. winter).
    • Optional: Any additional information the Ph.D. student would like to convey to the mentor. E.g., would you like to get specific feedback, like any specific questions you might have? General information you could consider to provide could involve: What career path is planned? Academia (in industry versus at a University), a job in industry, not sure yet? The mentoring program is intended to discuss such questions and more. So all this can just purely brought up during the mentoring, but the applicant may also phrase some of them in advance. This might help the mentor to get prepared, but it also helps the mentee to get the most out of the meeting and not miss anything.

All documents (except the list of preferred mentors) will be shared with the respective mentor so that she/he can make more informed comments.

Please follow the naming convention per file:

firstName-familyName--X.pdf with X in {00--preferredMentors, 01--supervisorStatement, 02--CV, 03--dissertationAbstract, 04--paperSample, 05--additionalInformation}.

Important Dates

ICAPS notification is February 18, so that any accepted ICAPS paper could be mentioned and even sent with the application.

Submission deadline: February 27, 2022
Notification date: March, 27, 2022
Paper feedback: tba
Final paper submission: tba
Doctoral Consortium: June 19th, 2022

Costs and Student Support

  • Participation costs will be included in the registration fees for ICAPS. Thus, anybody who wants to participate in the DC (participants and mentees) will have to register for it as part of the standard ICAPS registration.
  • If ICAPS (and thus the DC) happens to be entirely online, there's a very good chance that participation in the mentoring program will be free. This is however not perfectly clear yet and will be announced in time.
  • Additional financial support for students (for ICAPS conference fees or travel and/or accommodation costs) is likely to be implemented, though it is too early to confirm. We will announce this in time.

Format and Program

The program will be announced in time. We can already reveal some early information:

  • It will follow the same format as ICAPS, i.e., at least hybrid, potentially online (which implies that online participation will be possible no matter what)
  • Students will present their work in rather shorts talks and discuss them in more detail via posters.
  • Feedback from a mentor will be given in "private" 1-on-1 sessions with the respective mentor.
  • There will be some invited talk or group activity centered around a non-scientific topic (but related to academia in one way or another). We are happy to get any suggestions, so just reach out to us. :)
  • We also plan a social event. Again, let us know in case you have any suggestions (e.g., for those who are just online).

Collection of Previous DC Material

Each year, organizers put a lot of effort into coming up with a great program for the respective DC, one of the highlights being senior ICAPS members sharing their experience in form of invited talks. So we've put together a collection of those which were made available online:

  • Invited talk by Subbarao (Rao) Kambhampati from ICAPS DC 2020 on Planning in the age of deep learning. Zoom recording. Recording including the speaker.
  • Invited talk by Subbarao (Rao) Kambhampati from DC 2013 on How to write good papers and how to give good talks. Slides. Although this is an IJCAI DC talk and not an ICAPS DC talk we wanted to share it anyway since (a) the advice is general, and (b) it's from Rao, i.e., a planning researcher! Sadly, the talk wasn't recorded, but the slides still hold some valuable information, so check them out if you are interested.


The list of participants will be published in time.


The list of mentors will be published in time.

ICAPS DC 2022 Chairs (Organizers) / Contact Information

For any questions, feedback, or suggestions, please don't hesitate to reach out to us!