General Information

We aim at having an HSDIP workshop every year at ICAPS.
There is a permanent group that ensures that HSDIP is run at ICAPS every year, i.e. that there is a team of organizers who submit a proposal. Current members of that group are Daniel Gnad, Michael Katz, Thorsten Kloessner, and Alvaro Torralba. To drop out of that group, you need to find a successor.
There exists a google group for the workshop: hsdip@googlegroups.com

Timeline

Submission deadline for ICAPS workshop proposals is typically around December/January.
With acceptance notification, the organizers usually specify a rough schedule of when to publish the call, have paper submission, notifications, and so on.
TODO: include a sketch of a usual timeline here; e.g. Workshop date: week X => CRC submission: X-4 => Notification: X-8, ... (these are just some random numbers)

We discussed if we want to have a discord server for (a) having a place where the HSDIP community can discuss things, and (b) to simplify organizing the workshop and get rid of lengthy emails threads.
It might make sense to put together a schedule (see Timeline above) or requirements sheet or something like that where the organizers can look up what they should be doing and when it should be done. However, too much of that might take away from the creative process to try something new from time to time. It's not clear how essential something like that is, but it could help in teams with less experience.

Keep a relatively small organizing team each year, mainly because it feels inefficient to have to discuss every decision with a group of 7 people :) Have a separate group of reviewers so that the work for the organizers is not too large.

Do we want to adapt the submission and reviewing process to account for papers previously published at some conference vs. work in progress to discuss research ideas? That point came up in the SOCS'23 community meeting.
This could give more emphasis on works that are not very mature yet, but still interesting to discuss.
Submission format could also be different.. 4-6 pages for work in progress, and whatever is the format of the original venue for previously published papers. Then only work-in-progress papers end up on the workshop webpage, for the other we can simply add a link (if freely available).
Could be done by adding some field in the submission to specify if the paper has already been accepted to another conference, so that we only do a light reviewing based on whether the paper is relevant for HSDIP.
A special case are papers that are under submission somewhere else. They should probably get some reviews in case they are rejected at the other venue.
Papers in different tracks could have different presentation formats, e.g. previously published works get a short talk plus poster, work in progress gets a long talk (plus poster?).