tab * 3 TAB meetings and 2 TC meetings each year. TAB meeting participation is
* changes, control of conferences, and possible TAB actions regarding the
* TAB) other (Image database -- Mosaic). Steve Shafer:CV home page

table * was tabled by a vote of Yes (to table) 16, No 11, Abstain 14. Thus, no change

tabled * was tabled by a vote of Yes (to table) 16, No 11, Abstain 14. Thus, no change

take * Can we take the journal? Threaten to pull out and see what happens.
* something changes)? We don't distinguish, but take both.

taken * Passed: (Overwhelming, no exact count taken).
* with 1/3 of this past year taken by industrial vision special issues

takes * Avi: Currently IEEE CS takes too much money and we do not get much
* papers, the papers and attendees are not there. It takes more to
* Q: Who takes the finiancial risk? Hope proeedings from IEEE, up
* the 3 reviews, 2 come quickly, the third takes time.

talk * Is it strong enough? Talk to those involved in Robotics&Auto.

tampa * 1993 (see Tampa proposal above) and North East (NY area) 1993.
* proposed Tampa for June 1993.

tanimoto * Agenda item #10: Transactions on PAMI (S. Tanimoto): At the Publications
* Item 10. Transactionns-PAMI. (Anil Jain for S. Tanimoto) The
* K. Bowyer and D. Goldgof (S. Tanimoto and L. Shapiro program chairs)
* Tanimoto comment, there are many things that can be done and are

tcouncil * a Technical Committee). Software Engineering became a TCouncil, with

tcs * Even though publications are separate from the TCs it may be possible
* IEEE Computer will feature 1 or 2 TCs each issue. PAMI will appear in
* IEEE is recommending that all TCs have some structure that will make
* TCs.
* the TCs. Other journals in CS are less related others are

technical * IEEE Computer Society PAMI Technical Committee Meeting
* a Technical Committee). Software Engineering became a TCouncil, with
* Issues raised were Technical Council (a bit more freedom than
* of the technical committee.
* The agenda so far for the June PAMI Technical Committee Meeting

techniques * techniques to PR techniques.
* Workshop on Robust Vision Techniques (Haralick) within 14 months.

tel * b. Tel Aviv proposal: Yeshurun, Shashua, Weinshall, Edelman;

tell * can you tell if it is different (e.g. if it requires effort to

term * Agenda item #11: The term of J. Aggarwal ends on May 31, 1989.
* Agenda item #15: New Chair: T. Huang's term ends July 30. A committee
* Pages will remain constant over the near term.
* The term is over for Avi Kak. The nomination Committee of Tom

terrible * conferences is a terrible idea -- applications drive CV. More

terry * Again for Terry Boult for local arrangements.
* Recognition for local arrangements (Terry Boult).

thanked * Item 2. Announcements. Tom Huang thanked Jake Aggarwal for his

thanks * Herb Freeman expressed thanks to T. Huang for his service.
* Item 3. CVPR89. (Rama Chellappa) 330+ registered, thanks to John
* Thanks given to N. Ahuja, T. Huang and A. Rosenfeld for their work on
* The meeting ended with a thanks to Worthy, John and Rama for the success

thanksgiving * (Possible dates, in October 1995; or Week before Thanksgiving.)
* On the MTW after Thanksgiving in 1994 (November 28-30) (Hanson as
* Question regarding the dates (M-W before Thanksgiving), Gerard is
* Thanksgiving).

theater * Kresge Little Theater, M.I.T

their * committee to ask authors if they have an overlap in their
* for reviewers to do their reviews.
* PR authors believe that their papers will be treated properly.
* Thanks given to N. Ahuja, T. Huang and A. Rosenfeld for their work on
* the non-US PAMI members may receive the contents both from their national

them * get them to become active again. Maybe it needs a separate
* group to make decisions and bring them to the membership.
* question of whether one conference can handle all of them is another
* Service awards: We have given them, but we haven't done it lately
* them).
* them, how much to charge, what would they provide, what services would
* too late for them to arrange locations, there will be a meeting
7 for them.

then * chair of the TC, then the EC can bring the membership issue to the
* current entire membership and to establish how the 12 would then be
* determine, then the papers are different), can we trust the authors.
* Ranging workshop (Bir Bhanu) on October 9 with 9 presentations, then 4
* Several related items were then discussed:
* submissions and then to request that they withdraw the paper from one
* the US 4 members on the board. Then the discussion started of what
7 for then.

theory * theory/applied). Are separate tracks separate budgets, proceedings,

there * (CS-Press), which has helped publication. There is a CS committee
* (for presented and other papers). There will be an associated Passive
* (there is a motion workshop with it). The paper deadline is June
* (where is PR?). There is not much on Pattern Recognition in the
* 3. PAMI Journal. Kasturi. So far in 1995, there are 220 submissions.
* Agenda item #1: R. Bajcsy gave a report on ICCV-II: There were 306 papers
* a North American location should be presented at that time. There was
* Agenda Item #1: CVPR92, Narendra Ahuja. There were 357 submissions,
* an research centers. Deemed to be a success. There was a meeting
* be held there under IEEE-CS. It is now sponsored by SPIE and the Cosmos
* can be done between meetings. There is a need for other meetings.
* causing some of the backlog. There
* conferece. In IP, there is none. (Bolle) We tried to get Pattern
* dates). There are 4 distinct tracks: Computer Architecture, Signal
* delayed (due to audience members, etc.). Complain to Anil if there
* Discussion: General membership does not know what a TC is. There is
* Executive Board for decision making. History, there was an
* Freeman comment there is not a CVPR95.
* ftp.ads.com for access (there are some images already available from
* if accepted). After decisions are made, there will be about 7-10 days
* In 1995 there is only 1 major conference, so proposed to have a CV
* June 3-7, 1990. R. Bajcsy is the vice-chair. There will be 4 separate
* leave IEEE. All of these involve doing a lot of work, and there is
* meeting. But there is a 1/2 track for "experimental" papers/tracks.
* Negahdaripur, Goldgof). 1995, there is no CVPR, no ICPR, ... in the
* no more than 35 to one member. There are 92 non-US papers. A January
* Open question is whether there is running commentary (currently no).
* original paper. There is some support for topical survey papers --
* overlap). There will be a motion track, expect to have 2 tracks
* papers this allowed, but there was still strong support for the
* papers, the papers and attendees are not there. It takes more to
* papers. There is a limit of 3 parallel sessions (set by the facilities,
* past there has been a Workshop on Computer Vision as an outlet for
* Physics based vision (Shafer). There is space for 3 tracks.
* Policy on Multiple submissions, should there be one, is there one, how
* PR papers) or that no good ones were there. Question is whether we
* program. There is a possible Human-Computer Vision workshop on the
* So far, there are 316 pre registered and 53 walk-ins (369). An
* Steve: If there are enough people who feel that we should look at
* Tanimoto comment, there are many things that can be done and are
* The call for papers is out. There are 4 days before and 4 days after
* The rainy season is December/January, otherwise there is no difference
* There are about 1290 pages in the volume this year, or roughly 100 papers.
* there are cheaper nearby hotels. Meal costs are a larger issue -- no
* there are not the other conferences that make tons of money.
* There is a Workshop on Motion every about 3 years. Discussion of Florida
* there is an annual conference in roughly late June in the US (or North
* There is now a postscript version of the last 2 issues. If there is
* There was discussion that this should be deferred. The deferral
* There were 491 papers submitted, 2 reviewers for each paper with at
* too late for them to arrange locations, there will be a meeting
* Vision and Graphics, Learning in Computer Vision. There are new
* were sent out for determining the Roberts award. There was also some
55 for there.

these * 383 paid. Students 150 (In future look at these totals).
* areas covered, etc. A discussion of how to deal with these and how to
* leave IEEE. All of these involve doing a lot of work, and there is
* TC will prepare a proposal regarding conferences that addresses these
* These go with regular newsletter.
* unknown number of these are students. The original budget projection
6 for these.

they * A question regarding the weighting down of some reviewers since they
* because they don't fell that they will get a fair hearing (some
* committee to ask authors if they have an overlap in their
* Discussion on who they would report to?
* final decisions by the program co-chairs (Tsuji, Olaf, and Kak), they
* Issues with the computer society. Initially they wanted to budget
* provided at cost (rather than sales prices) if they were available.
* should be included in ICCV-3, since they are an important part of the
* submissions and then to request that they withdraw the paper from one
* them, how much to charge, what would they provide, what services would
* they had been mailed to the entire PAMI journal list or just the US portion
12 for they.

thing * after 5 meetings in cities (well Champaign-Urbana). Several things
* Current motion is an EC, which is a good thing that is willing to
* Patrick: How things have changed? Year ago budget was $4K, now
* Tanimoto comment, there are many things that can be done and are

think * 160 papers. One issue to think about is the single track, which would

third * 4. Third International Conference on Document Analysis and
* discussed and a possible third review was done (20 to each member over 1
* Discussion: no way to have third track in the hotel in the Seattle
* general chair, and Profs. Tsuji and Kak plus a third person (not yet
* PAMI mailing list. The third issue should
* sensitivity. This would be the third in a series (Seattle in 1990,
* the 3 reviews, 2 come quickly, the third takes time.
* third Computer Vision meeting in 2.5 months, all in California, and this
8 for third.

this * At this point a comment about the Agenda of the meeting being a
* (And said the chance of this happening is very low)
* 10 issues). This accounts for some of the requests to shorten the
* 210 papers were submitted, expect about 40%-60%. This meeting
*