Tutorial proposals should contain at least the following:

• A title and abstract of the tutorial.
• A brief description of the tutorial content and its relevance to the ECML PKDD community (no more than 2 pages).
• A brief outline of the tutorial structure showing that the tutorial’s core content can be covered in a 4 hours slot (including a 30 minutes break). The names and contact information of the tutorial instructors, including one-paragraph statements of their research interests and areas of expertise; it is required to indicate in the proposal who is planning to attend the conference and who will present which part.
• A list of previous venues and approximate audience sizes, if the same or a similar tutorial has been given elsewhere; otherwise an estimate of the audience size.
• A description of special requirements for technical equipment (e.g., audio equipment).
• An indication on whether the tutorial is part of a combined tutorial+workshop proposal. In that case, we kindly ask you to write a single proposal for the tutorial and workshop, following the guidelines and attending to the requirements for tutorials and workshops. For workshop guidelines, please see the separate Call For Workshop Proposals.
• Please provide a link to slides from earlier similar tutorials (if any).

Tutorial proposals will be reviewed by the workshop and tutorial co-chairs, who may use the help of external reviewers and experts on the submission topics. Features that will be evaluated are:

• The interestingness for the ECML PKDD areas, which should result in a large audience.
• The clarity of the tutorial, which should emerge from its description.
• Good organization as appearing from the outline.
• The scientific renown and experience of the tutorialists in the topic area of the proposed tutorial
• The ability to explain the topics to a large audience with heterogeneous background.

Workshop proposals should contain the necessary information for the workshop chairs and reviewers to judge the importance, quality, and community interest in the proposed topic (a minimum of 15-20 expected participants is required). Each workshop should have one or more designated organisers and a program. When proposing a workshop, please provide (at least) the following information:

• A brief description of the specific issues that the workshop will address, the reasons why the workshop is of interest, the main research areas involved, and what the workshop will add to the conference (e.g., do you expect papers of a theme that would not fit the main conference?).
• Contact information of the workshop chairs, their competence in the proposed topic(s), and previous experience in chairing scientific events.
• A tentative list of Program Committee members and potential invited speakers.
• A draft of the Call for Papers, including information on accepted formats (e.g., regular papers, extended abstracts, oral-only presentations of relevant recently published or submitted contributions, etc.) and expected format of the workshop (e.g., invited talks, presentations, poster sessions, panel discussions, challenge sessions, or other ideas for ensuring an interactive atmosphere). In the case of a combined tutorial-workshop, please clearly indicate the format.
• Any special requirements regarding logistics (e.g., poster stands, audio equipment), if applicable.
• An estimate of the number of expected submissions, and an estimate of the number of expected workshop participants at the conference. Proof of interest from the community will be of added value to the proposal.
• If you are making a proposal for a tutorial+workshop event, we kindly ask you to write a single proposal that covers both. In addition, the links should be clearly described and the proposal should be submitted to the workshop and tutorial chairs. For tutorial guidelines, please see the separate Call For Tutorial Proposals.

Workshop proposals will be reviewed by the workshop and tutorial co-chairs, who may use the help of external reviewers and experts on the submission topics. Features that will be evaluated are:

• The interestingness for the ECML PKDD areas, which should result in a large audience.
• The maturity and popularity of the workshop subject; we expect that the workshop addresses a small and active community of researchers, who ideally submit to the workshop every year
• Experience of the proposers in organizing such an event and contacts within the addressed community of researchers
• Involvement of renowned members of this community as anticipated authors or reviewers