# Emerging Researchers in Exoplanetary Science (ERES):
Lessons Learned in Conference Organization for Early-Career Researchers

W. Garrett Levine Dept. of Astronomy, Yale University. New Haven, CT 06511,
USA  Konstantin Gerbig Dept. of Astronomy, Yale University. New Haven, CT
06511, USA  Emma M. Louden Dept. of Astronomy, Yale University. New Haven, CT
06511, USA  Tiger Lu Dept. of Astronomy, Yale University. New Haven, CT 06511,
USA  Cheng-Han Hsieh Dept. of Astronomy, Yale University. New Haven, CT 06511,
USA  Christopher O’Connor Dept. of Astronomy and Cornell Center for
Astrophysics & Planetary Science, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY 14853, USA
Rixin Li Dept. of Astronomy, University of California, Berkeley, Berkeley, CA
94720, USA  Jiayin Dong Center for Computational Astrophysics, Flatiron
Institute, New York, NY 10010, USA

###### Abstract

Since 2015, the Emerging Researchers in Exoplanetary Science (ERES) conference
has provided a venue for early-career researchers in exoplanetary astronomy,
astrophysics, and planetary science to share their research, network, and
build new collaborations. ERES stands out in that it is spearheaded by early-
career researchers, providing a unique attendance experience for the
participants and a professional experience for the organizers. In this
Bulletin, we share experiences and lessons learned from the perspective of the
organizing committee for the 2023 edition of ERES. For this eighth ERES
conference, we hosted over 100 participants in New Haven, CT, for a three-day
program. This manuscript is aimed primarily toward groups of early-career
scientists who are planning a conference for their fields of study. We
anticipate that this Bulletin will continue dialogue within the academic
community about best practices for equitable event organization.

##  1 Introduction

Attending conferences and presenting one’s research is an integral part of
building an academic career, especially for early-career researchers such as
undergraduates, graduate students, and postdoctoral fellows. For those who
eventually pursue careers outside of the academic track, the public speaking
and networking skills developed at these meetings are equally critical. To
that end, the Emerging Researchers in Exoplanetary Science (ERES) symposium
was founded in 2015 by graduate students at Cornell, Penn State, and Yale.
While the first iterations were only open to scientists at those host
institutions for financial and logistical reasons, ERES has opened attendance
to participants from outside of the Northeast. In recent years, ERES has grown
into a preeminent global venue for early-career exoplanetary scientists to
share their research and network with others at similar career stages; the
2022 and 2023 iterations hosted by Penn State and Yale attracted 85 and 106
attendees, respectively.

Notably, ERES organization has always been led by early-career researchers.
While this structure introduces some challenges – ERES is often the first time
that most organizing committee (OC) members put together a conference – the
benefits of organically growing the event within the early-career community
are numerous. First, the scientific content, discussion topics, and networking
events are better tailored to the attendees’ needs. Second, the experience
equips OC members with logistical skills that will pay dividends in their
careers. Third, the peer-led OC promotes an atmosphere of camaraderie towards
an inclusive, relatable conference, allowing attendees to engage as embodied
participants.

Results from a post-conference survey from ERES 2023 were overwhelmingly
positive (see Sec. 2), affirming the value of a space designed for early-
career researchers to present and network. Through a generous grant from the
Heising-Simons Foundation, the conference had no registration fee, provided
meals and lodging for all participants, and covered travel costs for those who
would otherwise be unable to attend.

The ERES 2023 OC consisted exclusively of volunteer early-career researchers:
six graduate students and two postdoctoral fellows. In this Bulletin, we
provide a case study on conference organization for the astronomy community
from an early-career perspective. In other disciplines, early-career
astrobiologists have been particularly prolific at publicly documenting their
efforts toward organizing events (Jia et al., 2022; Nauny et al., 2022).
Within astronomy, the Future of Meetings group (Moss et al., 2021) has
discussed how conference organization has changed due to the COVID-19
pandemic. We anticipate that this manuscript will add to a growing body of
literature and benefit future groups of early-career researchers who organize
their own symposia.

Our OC benefited from numerous
online111https://www.exordo.com/blog/organising-conference-tips/
resources222https://www.london.ac.uk/venues/blog/how-plan-academic-conference
on conference organization, and we refer the reader to these references for
comprehensive, step-by-step checklists. Here, we focus on what we believe were
the most consequential choices that we made in preparing for ERES 2023. To
this end, Section 2 provides an overview of the event. Then, Section 3
highlights pre-conference logistical preparation. Section 4 details abstract
sorting and other scientific program considerations. Next, Section 5 describes
logistics during the conference itself. Finally, Sections 6 and 7 serve to
summarize lessons learned and to look ahead to future ERES symposia.

##  2 ERES 2023 Symposium

The eighth ERES was hosted by Yale University from June 18-20, 2023. All
conference-related events, including the scientific program, group meals, and
lodging, were held at the Omni Hotel at Yale in downtown New Haven, CT. Some
attendees arrived on Sunday, June 18, but participants from closer to New
Haven arrived on the morning of Monday, June 19. In-person attendance was the
only option for ERES 2023. The 106 attendees hailed from 53 institutions and 4
countries.

Figure 1: Results from a backward-looking and a forward-looking question from
the ERES 2023 post-conference survey. On both questions, higher numerical
values correspond to more favorable scores. This survey was optional and sent
to participants via the attendee Slack workspace after the conference ended.

The block schedule for ERES 2023 can be found in Appendix A. The scientific
program featured 37 oral presentations and 64 posters. The presenters were a
mix of undergraduates, graduate students, and postdoctoral researchers. Oral
sessions were in plenary format, with one room dedicated to these talks. All
posters were on display for the entire conference, and poster sessions were
held jointly with coffee breaks between oral sessions.

In addition, a professional development panel with two senior astronomers
covered topics such as building a professional network, academic and non-
academic career paths, job application strategies, interviewing and
negotiation techniques, and managing teams in academia, industry, and
government. After predetermined questions, there was open Q&A.

As a condition of registering for the conference, all attendees and organizers
agreed to follow a Code of Conduct; the full text is available in Appendix B.
Some of the ERES Code of Conduct’s content used language borrowed from the
existing AAS Code of Ethics333https://aas.org/policies/ethics. During the
conference, designated OC members were available via in-person conversation,
phone, and email in case of concerns related to the Code. An anonymous form
was also available as an alternative reporting avenue.

Outside of the science program, buffet-style meals were provided for all
participants to encourage networking and to reduce the cost of attendance. On
the evening of Monday, June 19, a trivia night (with small prizes for the
winners) was offered as an optional informal social event. Since ERES was not
held on Yale’s campus itself, a sense of place was established by welcoming a
visit from Yale’s bulldog mascot, Handsome Dan, for lunch and group photos on
Tuesday, June 20.

Especially for early-career researchers, conferences are an opportunity to
assess the host institution as a potential future employer. To facilitate this
outcome, we offered an optional one-hour campus tour after the scientific
program had concluded. This event was not on the original agenda and was added
by popular demand.

After the conference, attendees were asked to complete an online feedback
form. These results indicate that ERES 2023 was successful in facilitating
networking, scientific discussion, and community-building among the
participants. Figure 1 provides a summary from two questions, and Appendix C
provides additional data.

##  3 Pre-Conference Logistics

Organizing ERES was a team effort, including all members of the OC, the Yale
Astronomy department and business office, the participants, and the Heising-
Simons Foundation. Our overarching philosophy was to make decisions that
simplified the planning process and logistics. Buy-in, resilience, and
planning in advance were critical to the success of ERES. We established
timelines in Fall 2022 for when we needed to reach milestones, giving us a
clear roadmap (see Appendix D).

###  3.1 Organizing Committee Structure

Two Yale graduate students had served on the OC for ERES 2022 at Penn State,
which smoothed the transition to the ERES 2023 organization. In addition, the
lead organizer from Penn State during the previous year served on the ERES
2023 OC in an advisory role. This continuity was critical to ensuring the
success of ERES 2023. This systematic handover provided a strong foundation to
capitalize on past experience, and the tradition of mentorship within the ERES
OC underscores the essence of the conference itself.

In total, the ERES 2023 committee consisted of five graduate students from
Yale Astronomy (ERES 2023 host), one former graduate student from Penn State
Astronomy (ERES 2022 host), and one graduate student and one postdoc from
Cornell Astronomy (likely ERES 2024 host). Cornell OC members secured
departmental support for tentatively hosting ERES 2024, ensuring that their
experience would benefit the next ERES.

Having an OC composed of early-career researchers was empowering. We strongly
recommend this format to other groups of early-career researchers who wish to
organize their own symposia. Our faculty mentors were unwaveringly supportive
and provided insightful advice, but early-career researchers were the ultimate
stakeholders and the ones most affected by the conference’s purpose, outcome,
and long-term viability. Our approach solidified the genuine impact and
relevance of ERES to the early-career exoplanet community.

###  3.2 OC Time Management

We deliberately minimized the time involved for all OC members. All personnel
were only required to attend meetings relevant to their responsibilities, but
updates were sent on a shared Slack workspace for all to see. In February
2023, we held an in-person meeting with the entire OC. Otherwise, all catch-
ups involved only a subset of the group. Since planning for the logistical
aspects and the scientific program often did not overlap, we divided members
into a logistical organizing committee and a scientific organizing committee
early in the process. The leaders of these groups managed and delegated tasks
among OC members with availability.

Building buffers into the planning timeline and having redundancy on the OC
was important to accommodate the ebbs and flows of early-stage academic
careers. Nobody was a professional conference organizer and could not
prioritize ERES over research. A mutual understanding that we were all in
similar positions helped to cultivate a strong team. OCs of early-career
researchers should be large in size, with members participating as their
schedules allow.

###  3.3 Budget Management

Conference participants were nearly all undergraduates, post-baccalaureate
researchers, graduate students, or postdocs. As such, we attempted to
eliminate barriers to attendance that may affect early-career scientists. Many
of these hurdles are financial in nature, and ERES has been fortunate to be
supported by the Heising-Simons Foundation since 2018. With a grant for ERES
2023, participants without other travel funding could attend at no cost.
Moreover, this funding from Heising-Simons covered lodging and food for all
participants. While group meals are not included at many astronomy
conferences, we believe that removing this financial barrier and adding time
for informal networking was beneficial in the early-career conference setting.

One barrier to participation that we were unable to resolve was the
prerequisite in-person attendance. Travel added logistical complications,
especially for those doing summer programs and for researchers located far
from New Haven. Whether we should offer a hybrid option was discussed at
length amongst the OC, but we decided that our budget was best used to improve
the in-person experience and to defray costs for participants traveling to New
Haven. We believe that the community-building goal of ERES is only possible
in-person. Even recording the talks for asynchronous viewing would have come
at a substantial cost and logistical burden.

ERES 2023 had record interest, as over 160 early-career researchers initially
registered. Attrition was an issue later – we discuss this matter further in
Section 6. We did not expect this number of sign-ups and subsequently modified
our initial plan to accommodate this interest. The major changes were as
follows:

  * •

Participants with less than a 4-hour drive to New Haven were asked to arrive
on Monday morning instead of Sunday evening, saving costs on Sunday night for
hotel rooms and meals.

  * •

Those same participants were not provided lodging on Tuesday night, but were
provided meals on Monday and Tuesday with all other attendees.

  * •

Instead of a traditional 9AM-5PM schedule on both days, we began the
scientific program at 10:45 AM on Monday morning to give Monday morning
arrivals more time to get to New Haven.

  * •

We asked for volunteers to share hotel rooms, to which we got an outstanding
response. Originally, we had budgeted for all participants to have single
rooms. With the buy-in from attendees, we were able to use only the originally
anticipated number of hotel rooms. We understood that not everybody is
comfortable sharing rooms, so we emphasized that this request was entirely
voluntary.

To explore whether we could increase our total budget, we initiated
discussions with philanthropic divisions of corporations in the space
industry. We were unable to secure additional funding from these sources, but
we were generously granted backstop funding from the Yale Astronomy and
Physics departments to accommodate the additional interest. Because of the
aforementioned attrition, we did not draw heavily on these funds. In total, we
were able to provide a no-cost conference to attendees because of the
participants’ shared sense of responsibility toward the mission of ERES.

###  3.4 Promotion & Attendee Communication

ERES maintains an account on X (formerly Twitter) to publicize the conference.
We posted when registration opened and directed people to a standalone website
(made with Canva) for more information. As of October 2023, the home page has
over 2800 views, and the registration posts on X received over 10,000
impressions.

Despite these efforts on social media, a plurality of participants who
responded to the post-conference survey reported hearing about ERES primarily
via word-of-mouth (see Figure 2). While this result is a testament to the
grassroots nature of ERES, it also indicates that our social media presence
could expand. For example, future organizers could build a standing website
that is passed from one OC to the next one. In addition to providing a
permanent online home for ERES, the website could link to a standing Zenodo
repository where conference abstracts can be assigned a DOI. Future OCs could
also create accounts on BlueSky or other X alternatives.

Figure 2: Results from a question on the post-conference survey asking how
attendees learned about the conference. Word-of-mouth was the predominant
component, although department mailing lists were also important.

To register for the ERES, participants were required to join a Slack workspace
(free version) and were told that all future communication from the OC would
be on this platform. Limiting messages to Slack helped the OC to streamline
communication. Having a channel dedicated to logistical questions helped all
OC members stay updated on all communication with attendees. Email was the
primary means of communication in past years, but we are pleased with our
decision to use Slack instead.

During registration, we asked attendees to submit information that would be
necessary for reimbursement. This framework reduced the amount of tracking-
down that needed to be done after the conference. At sign-up time, we also
communicated what documentation of travel costs would be required for
reimbursement. By setting a reimbursement processing plan with the Yale
Astronomy business office before sending abstract acceptance emails, we
reduced the overall logistical burden.

We required that attendees book travel within two weeks of receiving their
acceptance to the conference to enable a relatively accurate headcount for
hotel rooms and catering. In retrospect, we should have only required that
airfare be booked – our request led to many questions about booking ground
transportation.

Between registration and the conference, we maintained frequent communication
with attendees regarding travel and lodging. Participants were divided among
the OC members such that all attendees had an assigned point of contact. This
decision spread out the workload and allowed for more personalized
communication. We maintained a list of FAQs on the website but should have
kept a running log of questions from last year’s ERES to be proactive.
Recommendations for travel to New Haven were among the most common questions.

##  4 Scientific Program Organization

Figure 3: Flowchart visualizing the selection process for oral presentations,
centered around a double-blind review with the aim to minimize biases.
Notably, the review process did not distinguish between submissions that
requested only an oral presentation versus those interested in either talks or
posters. Every submission was accepted for a poster presentation; hence, the
discrepancy between the number of initial submissions and final presentations
is due to attrition as discussed in Sect. 6.3.

The ERES 2023 abstract submission form asked participants to indicate their
interest in an oral presentation, a poster, or both. We originally planned to
have 32 talks, but we received 45 “oral only” and 74 “either oral or poster”
submissions (versus 21 “poster only”). Even after expanding to 37 talks, these
slots were 2x oversubscribed due to the record number of registrants.

Here, we detail the double-blind review process that we implemented to sort
the abstracts and share other aspects of the scientific program organization
that we believe could benefit future early-career conferences.

###  4.1 Abstract Review Process

For reference, our procedure for reviewing submitted abstracts is illustrated
in Figure 3. All information from the registration form, including titles,
abstracts, and talk versus poster preferences, was saved in a Google Sheet. We
wrote a python script that pulled abstracts of participants who requested
talks from this sheet, anonymized the entries, and randomly shuffled the
order. This code is available upon reasonable request to the authors. Each
abstract was distributed to two random members of the science OC for a blind
review. Importantly, each submission was reduced to only the title and
abstract; the career stage was omitted. Reviewers flagged conflicts of
interest if they recognized a submission’s author, in which case the abstract
was redistributed randomly to another person. Scores were assigned on a 0-5
scale on each of the following metrics: Originality & Innovation,
Significance, Clarity & Coherence, and Relevance to ERES. Each submission thus
received eight scores from two reviewers for each metric, with a maximum
possible score of 40.

Once the scoring was concluded, we normalized scores such that each reviewer’s
collection of submissions had an average score of 2.5 on each individual
metric. This procedure compensated for different mean scores from each
reviewer and assumed that the samples of submissions each reviewer is assigned
to are statistically identical in quality. We believe that this assumption was
largely realized since each reviewer had approximately 35 randomly assigned
abstracts. Summed scores from all categories from both reviewers were
projected onto a 1-100 scale. Then, de-anonymization led to the final ranking
of all abstract submissions.

Ideally, each abstract would have been reviewed by all reviewers. This task
was infeasible, given the number of submissions and the time constraints of OC
members. In addition, the performed correction implicitly assumed that each
reviewer’s scores followed the same underlying distribution (as we solely
corrected for the mean). This was demonstrably not the case in the actual
review, as some used the full 0-5 scales, some gave similar scores for all
submissions, and some reviewers even produced bimodal distributions. We
ultimately decided against performing additional adjustments, such as re-
scaling scores by the standard deviation of the respective reviewer, to avoid
unnecessary complexity on what would have been a small effect on the relative
rankings.

In total, our abstract review methodology generated a ranking that was broadly
representative of the attendees’ home institutions, participant career stages,
and preferred pronouns. This result underscores the benefits of a double-blind
review. Nonetheless, the ranking did prefer certain sub-fields within the
broader exoplanet discipline over others. This outcome was likely indicative
of the OC’s own research interests; most members were theorists studying
celestial dynamics and magnetohydrodynamics. To avoid propagating this bias to
the talk schedule, we decided on the science session topics before the double-
blind review based on the content of submitted abstracts and filled the
available slots by category from the ranked subset of abstracts in that group.

Overall, we deemed the abstract review process successful in our goal of
reducing implicit bias. One logistical lesson learned is that the abstract
submission form should ask registrants to tag their presentation among a group
of standardized topics. Asking participants to pre-sort would have saved time
for the OC and possibly reduced additional bias, as we had to manually assign
topics to all submissions. To foster community engagement and to provide a
larger set of reviewers for each abstract, we recommend that future organizers
consider including non-OC members (perhaps the conference participants
themselves) in the double-blind review.

###  4.2 Presentation Types & Coordination

We did not anticipate such demand for oral presentations, as we aimed to
provide substantial opportunities for poster presenters and talk-givers to
share their science. Our goal was to make both formats equally desirable, so
the actual balance of submissions was not the intended outcome. We opted for a
large space at the hotel for the poster hall that allowed us to display all
posters for the whole conference. By allotting four poster sessions, we hoped
that all attendees could share their work without feeling rushed. Future
groups of early-career conference organizers could set expectations in advance
by advertising tentative talk lengths and the amount of time dedicated to the
posters during the sign-up period.

ERES has never had keynote presentations, and this year was no exception.
Differentiating between early-career researchers would have complicated the
organization and introduced additional subjectivity into the abstract sorting
process. We are happy with this decision and believe that a standardized talk
timeslot promoted a more egalitarian conference culture.

In the week before ERES, oral presenters were asked to send their slides to
the science OC chair at least two days before the start of the conference.
Edits were allowed until the day before the presentations. Only PowerPoint,
Keynote, and PDF presentations were accepted to minimize the possibility of
technical problems. In the future, a Google Drive or other repository may
streamline this process and reduce the workload for the OC.

We did not offer onsite printing services for poster presenters, so attendees
needed to bring posters to New Haven or find a local printing service. The OC
fielded many questions on poster logistics; future organizers could consider
providing information on poster printing on the conference website’s FAQ
section. Notably, the cost of printing an academic poster is a financial
barrier to attendance that we did not defray for participants.

###  4.3 Career Panel Preparation

During the past few ERES conferences, the only participation by senior
astronomers has been on a professional development panel. At ERES 2022, the
panel’s focus was the 2020 Decadal Survey and different career pathways in
Astronomy. We focused this year on navigating the job market, a relevant topic
for early-career attendees. To make the panel helpful for a broad swath of
participants, we recruited speakers who pursued various career trajectories
after PhD programs in astronomy and astrophysics. We aimed to recruit a
professor at an R1 university, a NASA scientist specializing in mission
design, and somebody who pursued a career outside of astrophysics. Although we
successfully recruited panelists from among the professional networks of OC
members to fill the first two categories, the third one went unfilled since no
potential panelists were available during the dates of ERES.

For the first part of the panel with predetermined questions, the OC developed
discussion topics in consultation with the panelists. Both panelists had
similar amounts of time to speak about their backgrounds, and we tried to
craft questions to which both panelists could respond. This part of the panel
took 40 minutes, leaving the final 20 minutes for open Q&A from the audience.

The feedback about the career panel on the post-conference survey was overall
positive (see Figure 5), and we recommend that other conferences for early-
career researchers build time into the scientific program for similar
conversations. Scheduling the scientific program after determining
availability for potential panelists may help with finding panelists to
participate. ERES is a unique space for conversations about career planning,
the state of the discipline, and professional development; panels can serve as
structured environments to focus these important discussions.

##  5 Conference Execution

We knew that establishing a sense of professionalism at the symposium was
important, so we aimed to provide a smooth logistical experience and promote
productive scientific discussions. All conference-related events were held at
the hotel, and we strongly recommend that future events for early-career
researchers consider this option. This decision increased accessibility and
streamlined the logistics; the scientific program and group meals were located
on the same floor, and participants could go to-and-from their rooms during
the day. Through a single contact at the Omni, we coordinated the space,
lodging, catering, and audiovisual setup.

###  5.1 Interfacing with Participants

Depending on their arrival time, participants could check in either at dinner
on Sunday or at breakfast on Monday. We provided nametags, ERES-themed
notebooks, stickers, pens, and a Yale Astronomy pizza cutter since New Haven
is famous for pizza. We opted for high-quality notebooks, a decision which we
believe helped set the tone for the conference as high-quality itself.

We began a pilot program this year where oral session chairs were not solely
OC members. We solicited volunteers from the participants themselves, adding
to the sense of early-career ownership. For each session, we aimed to have two
chairs; sessions before time-sensitive events were co-chaired by OC members.
We asked chairs to meet with the session presenters 20 minutes beforehand for
an audiovisual check and to ensure that all names and affiliations were
pronounced correctly.

At the conclusion of each oral session, a member of the OC spoke to give
logistical announcements and to provide participants with directions to the
next events on the schedule. These frequent updates contributed to keeping the
scientific program on time, which ensured that all oral and poster presenters
were given their allotted time. Having a smoothly running program also helped
attendees with tight travel plans participate in the entire conference.

During the group lunch on Tuesday, representatives from the Yale Astronomy
business office held “reimbursement office hours,” where participants could
ask questions about required documentation and discuss edge cases that were
not covered by the directions sent to the whole group. By getting ahead of
issues that might arise after ERES, we reduced the post-conference burden on
both the OC and the business office.

###  5.2 OC Assignments and Duties

Most OC members elected not to contribute an abstract. Having everybody
available for logistics during the entire meeting was worthwhile, and we were
happy that we did not have to balance preparing for a scientific presentation
with organizational responsibilities.

The OC had an “office,” which was a small meeting room next to the oral
session hall. Having this space was more important than we had initially
realized. This room was a secure place to store materials and personal items,
and having a quiet space to take five-minute breaks was helpful for restoring
mental stamina. A private area was also helpful for on-the-fly coordination.
We recommend that organizers secure a similar space at future conferences.

Two OC roles that kept the conference running smoothly were assigned point
people for the catering and audiovisual. These people ensured that meals were
ready on-time and that the projector and microphone were ready for each
session. The audiovisual lead stayed in the presentation room during all oral
sessions and doubled as a photographer to document the event. We later shared
the photos with participants, many of whom reported using these pictures on
their social media and professional websites. Delegating responsibilities in
advance reduced decision fatigue for the OC and provided third-party vendors
with a consistent point-of-contact.

Much of the intra-OC communication during ERES was via Slack. Each night,
however, we held a 30-minute synchronous check-in meeting to debrief on the
day’s activities and to confirm that all tasks were assigned for the next day.
This OC meeting served as an important transition from one day to the next.

##  6 Post-Conference: Lessons Learned

We believe that ERES achieved its goal of providing a venue for scientific
discussion and networking among early career researchers, but some aspects
would have benefitted from hindsight. Here, we comment on a few areas for
improvement that were identified through the post-conference survey and
debrief OC discussions.

###  6.1 Gathering Community Feedback

Participation in the post-conference survey was lower than we had hoped, with
only approximately 40% of attendees responding. While a significant fraction
of the attendees, we would prefer for this number to approach 100%. Future
ERES conferences could run a feedback survey during the final session to boost
participation.

In hindsight, we realize that a gathering of around 100 early-career
researchers provides a serendipitous opportunity to gather data on the general
health of the community. Opt-in focus groups could ask about challenges faced
by the attendees and solicit ideas for early-career researchers to support
each other. This initiative would align with ERES’ goal of being a positive
force towards community-building among the stakeholders.

###  6.2 Conference Venue Layout

Feedback on the post-conference survey indicated that one of the weaknesses of
ERES 2023 was the venue layout (see Appendix C). Attendees sitting towards the
back of the oral session hall had difficulty seeing the slides, and there was
limited access to natural daylight in the conference venue. While OC members
did multiple walk-throughs of the venue with hotel staff before the
conference, we did not test lines-of-sight for the full conference setup by
sitting in various places in the room. An elevated screen or multiple
synchronized projectors would have alleviated some of these concerns.

###  6.3 Attendee Attrition

Our initial round of registration surpassed 160 sign-ups. As the conference
approached, however, attrition was an issue; more than 140 people accepted
their conference invitations once abstracts were sorted, but only 106 ended up
attending the conference. Many did not cancel until the week before ERES.
Because participants could attend ERES at no cost, we suspect that there was
less of a psychological and financial barrier to canceling versus conferences
that charge registration fees. Logistically, this 35% dropout rate was a major
issue. We budgeted conservatively and assumed that all participants who were
signed up at any point in time would actually attend the conference. This
approach ensured that we would retain a balanced budget but also meant that
our funds were not allocated as efficiently as possible.

We are conflicted on how to account for attrition and reduce this rate. Since
we could not overextend funding promises to attendees, we believe that our
budgeting approach was warranted. Assuming an attrition rate in our initial
budget would have worked for this conference in retrospect, but it was a risk
that we deemed not worthwhile. Next year, we will aim to convey the scope of
the attrition issue to potential participants while sign-ups are open. The
participants are the ultimate stakeholders in ERES, and conveying the same
camaraderie during the registration period that was present during the
conference itself could help to reduce attrition.

At a structural level, we discussed adding a small registration deposit, which
would be refunded after attending ERES. However, this fee would have imposed a
financial burden on the attendees and a logistical burden on the organizers.
For these reasons, we opted to avoid this path. We leave the topic of handling
attrition open for now, but we hope that the above discussion can provide some
insight for future conference organizers.

##  7 Conclusions & Looking Ahead

In the past eight years, ERES has grown from a local meeting of a few
institutions into a conference of international importance for early-career
exoplanet researchers. We are proud of the self-organized nature of ERES and
intend to maintain this structure, but we may consider future collaborations
with professional societies and new host schools. At present, attendees from
outside of the East Coast have needed to travel for several hours to attend
ERES every year.

Reflecting on the planning and execution of ERES, we believe that the
following are our biggest takeaways:

  * •

The attributes required for successfully organizing a conference overlap
substantially with those required for success in academic research and in
industry careers: time and project management, resilience, and teamwork.

  * •

Especially for conferences aimed at early-career researchers, ensuring
accessibility is critical. ERES has been successful due to the financial
generosity of the Heising-Simons Foundation, financial and administrative
support from host departments, and volunteer OCs. Together, these forces have
eliminated the cost of attendance for participants without other sources of
funding.

  * •

Continuity between events in the series is important to retain institutional
knowledge, plan effectively, and organize efficiently. Early-career
researchers balance numerous academic and professional responsibilities, so
mentorship from former OC members and faculty advisors is key.

  * •

Buy-in from attendees is a prerequisite for a professional, welcoming, and
inclusive event.

The engagement, feedback, and progress that we witnessed this year serve as a
testament to ERES’ value. Conversations with participants suggest that ERES
has led to new research collaborations among early-career scientists. With
each iteration, we aim to further enrich the community of early-career
exoplanet researchers. We are excited about the future trajectory of this
event.

Finally, we invite other groups of (early-career or otherwise) researchers who
are considering organizing a conference to contact us with any questions about
our experience. We would be happy to share our perspective and receive
community input to further improve future iterations of ERES. We hope that
this Bulletin inspires others to create and lead their own symposia or other
events that are tailored toward early-career researchers in their fields. We
believe that initiatives like ERES help to advance research and to promote an
inclusive community in which to develop future scientific leaders. By coming
together as an early-career researcher community, we elevate our own
scientific knowledge, broaden our cultural horizons, and ignite the collective
curiosity that drives community-driven scientific discovery.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS: We are grateful for the generous financial support from the
Heising-Simons Foundation towards the 2018, 2019, 2022, and 2023 iterations of
this conference. In addition, we are indebted to the members of past ERES
organizing committees for their hard work and dedication. We thank all of the
participants from past ERES conferences for their scientific contributions,
energy, enthusiasm, and feedback.

We thank Yale Astronomy for their institutional support of ERES and are
especially appreciative of the faculty advisors: Priyamvada Natarajan, Greg
Laughlin, and Sarbani Basu. Finally, we thank the Yale Astronomy business
office – Hannah Carroll, Maria Troiano, Robyn Lisone, Teena Griggs, Stacey
Hampton, Shawna Rodriguez, and Geriana Van Atta – for going above-and-beyond
their departmental responsibilities to help with the event. Without this
departmental and administrative support, ERES would not have been possible.

Sections of this manuscript were edited for typographical errors, clarity, and
conciseness with assistance from OpenAI’s GPT-4. Some figures were made with
numpy (Harris et al., 2020) and matplotlib (Hunter, 2007).

## References

  * Harris et al. (2020) Harris, C. R., Millman, K. J., van der Walt, S. J., et al. 2020, Nature, 585, 357, doi: 10.1038/s41586-020-2649-2
  * Hunter (2007) Hunter, J. D. 2007, Computing in Science and Engineering, 9, 90, doi: 10.1109/MCSE.2007.55
  * Jia et al. (2022) Jia, T. Z., Johnson-Finn, K. N., Alian, O. M., et al. 2022, International Journal of Astrobiology, 21, 497, doi: 10.1017/S1473550422000258
  * Moss et al. (2021) Moss, V. A., Adcock, M., Hotan, A. W., et al. 2021, Nature Astronomy, 5, 213, doi: 10.1038/s41550-021-01325-z
  * Nauny et al. (2022) Nauny, P., Cassaro, A., Kopacz, N., et al. 2022, International Journal of Astrobiology, 21, 268, doi: 10.1017/S1473550422000040

##  Appendix A Conference Schedule

In Figure 4, we show the block schedule that was disseminated to participants
in the abstract book. Two events that were added later were the trivia night
on Monday, June 19, and the Yale campus tour on Tuesday, June 20.

Figure 4: Block schedule for ERES 2023. Attendees were also given a PDF
abstract book with more detailed information on the scientific program and
conference logistics.

##  Appendix B ERES 2023 Code of Conduct

ERES 2023 is committed to maintaining a professional environment that promotes
respect, equality of opportunity, and fair treatment for all individuals. All
participants of ERES 2023 at Yale, including the organizing committee and
external attendees, are expected to adhere to the following principles of
conduct toward others:

Respect: All people encountered in a professional setting should be treated
with respect at all times. Abusive, demeaning, humiliating, or intimidating
behavior is unacceptable and will not be tolerated. This includes behavior
based on factors such as gender, race, ethnic and national origin, religion,
age, marital status, sexual orientation, gender identity and expression,
disability, veteran status, or any other protected class.

Free Expression and Exchange of Ideas: ERES 2023 encourages the free
expression and exchange of scientific ideas. Scientists should create an
environment that fosters open discussion and respectful disagreement,
regardless of differences in opinions or positions.

Unacceptable Behaviors: ERES 2023 prohibits behaviors that are considered
unacceptable, including but not limited to:

  * •

Harassment: Harassment based on factors such as race, religion, color, gender,
age, national origin, disability, marital status, sexual orientation, gender
identity and expression, or any other protected class, is strictly prohibited.
This includes verbal harassment (e.g., offensive comments, slurs, teasing,
stereotyping), nonverbal harassment (e.g., distribution or display of
inappropriate written or graphic material), and physical harassment (e.g.,
physical assault or violating personal space).

  * •

Sexual Harassment: Sexual harassment, including “quid pro quo” harassment or
creating a hostile work environment, is unacceptable. This includes unwelcome
sexual attention, requests for sexual favors, sexually oriented conduct that
interferes with job performance, or creating an offensive or unpleasant
working environment.

  * •

Bullying: Bullying behavior, such as demeaning, intimidating, or sabotaging
the work of others, whether as individuals or as a group, is unacceptable.
This includes verbal bullying (e.g., threatening, slandering, ridiculing),
physical bullying (e.g., pushing, assaulting), gesture bullying (e.g.,
nonverbal threatening gestures), or sabotaging an individual’s work.

Professionalism: Attendees at ERES 2023 should be expected to maintain a high
level of professionalism in their interactions with others. This includes
treating all attendees with respect, refraining from engaging in
discriminatory, harassing, or abusive behavior, and maintaining a positive and
inclusive atmosphere for all participants.

Responsibility of Senior Members: Senior attendees, including research
supervisors, have a special responsibility to facilitate the research,
educational, and professional development of students and subordinates. This
includes providing safe and supportive work environments, appropriate
acknowledgment of their contributions to research results, and protection of
their academic freedom. It also includes supporting the career aspirations of
undergraduate students, graduate students and young professionals, whether
they choose an academic or non-academic career path.

Presentation Ethics: Presenters at ERES 2023 should adhere to ethical
guidelines for presenting and publishing their research. This includes
properly citing the work of others, avoiding plagiarism, and presenting
research findings accurately and transparently. Any potential conflicts of
interest should be disclosed, and presenters should refrain from
misrepresenting their research or making exaggerated claims.

Intellectual Property: Attendees should respect the intellectual property
rights of others, including not using or sharing others’ data, results, or
ideas without proper attribution or permission. Attendees should also be
mindful of protecting their own intellectual property, such as research ideas
or unpublished findings, and take appropriate measures to prevent unauthorized
use or disclosure.

Responsible Conduct of Research: Attendees should adhere to responsible
research practices, including conducting research in an ethical, transparent,
and reproducible manner. This includes following appropriate research
methodologies, handling data and materials responsibly, and maintaining
integrity in reporting research findings.

Collaborative and Collegial Conduct: Attendees should foster a collaborative
and collegial environment at the ERES 2023, promoting constructive
discussions, exchanging ideas and knowledge, and engaging in respectful
debate. Attendees should also respect the diversity of opinions, backgrounds,
and perspectives among conference participants and avoid engaging in behavior
that may harm professional relationships or create a hostile environment.

Compliance with Laws and Regulations: Attendees should comply with all
applicable laws, regulations, and policies relevant to the conference,
including those related to ethics, data protection, safety, and intellectual
property. This includes obtaining necessary permissions, approvals, or permits
for conducting research, and adhering to any local or regional regulations
governing the conference.

Slack Etiquette: This code of conduct also applies to virtual interactions on
the associated Slack workspace leading up to, during, and after the
conference. Attendees should maintain a respectful and professional
environment, use appropriate language, follow channel guidelines, maintain
confidentiality, be responsive and collaborative, and report any inappropriate
behavior.

Handling Potential Breaches of the Code of Conduct: If you experience or
witness a breach of the code of conduct, it is important to report it
promptly. We take breaches of the code of conduct seriously and will take
appropriate action to address the situation. This may result in consequences
such as warnings, removal from the conference, or other appropriate actions.

To report an incident, please contact redacted, who form the Conduct & Safety
Committee within ERES 2023, either in-person, via email, or on Slack. You can
also reach out to any other member of the organizing committee.

Further Reading: ERES 2023 is committed to following the guidelines outlined
in the AAS Code of Ethics.

##  Appendix C Post-Conference Survey

Here, we present additional results of the post-conference survey introduced
in Section 2. Although the form was anonymous, we elect not to present any
answers from text-box questions for privacy purposes. The breakdown of
participants who completed the survey was as follows: 20 graduate students in
at least their fourth year, 14 graduate students in years 1-3, 10 postdocs,
and 7 undergraduates, amounting to about 40% of attendees. Figure 5 shows the
results from several questions where participants were asked to score various
aspects of ERES 2023 on a 1-5 scale. The quantitative results have provided
important feedback that will be considered when planning ERES 2024.

The written feedback reflected the overall positive tone about the
opportunities for professional development that a conference for early-career
researchers provided and a desire for more time in a safe space with peers.
There were multiple requests for an additional day of the conference for more
presentations and flash talks for poster presenters.

Figure 5: Selected results from the optional ERES post-conference survey. All
scores were given on a scale where 1 and 5 are the least and most favorable,
respectively. Attendees gave favorable ratings to all aspects of the
conference and were especially positive on communication from the OC.

##  Appendix D Conference Gantt Chart

In Figure 6, we show the timeline used to plan key steps in the conference
organization process. The OC used Notion to keep a running list of tasks that
could be assigned to individuals and viewed as a timeline, to-do list, or
table.

We did not use professional software to organize either the logistics or the
scientific program. We used Google Docs and Google Sheets to work
collaboratively and used Notion to keep a running to-do list. If ERES symposia
continue to exceed 100 attendees, then specialized conference organization
software might be a worthwhile investment.

Figure 6: Gantt project planning schedule for ERES 2023 that was followed by
the OC for conference organization.