Presentation Abstracts

Then return here with those insights to inform the abstract writing.

Key Files

• kent-beck-guidance.md — Kent Beck's advice on writing compelling paper/presentation abstracts

The Four-Sentence Abstract Structure

Based on Kent Beck's approach, aim for an abstract with four key sentences (flexibly applied):

1. State the problem — What challenge or gap exists?
2. Why it matters — Why should the audience care about this problem?
3. Your startling sentence — The core insight, solution, or claim (this is the hook!)
4. The implication — What does this mean for the audience? What will they gain?

Example Structure

[Problem]: Many developers struggle with testing code that uses HttpClient. [Why it matters]: Without proper testing, bugs slip through and refactoring becomes risky. [Startling sentence]: You can fully mock HttpClient in three simple patterns without any external libraries. [Implication]: Attendees will leave with reusable patterns they can apply immediately in their own projects.

Writing Guidelines

Know Your Audience

• Primary audience: The program committee / selection reviewers
• They're experts who've seen hundreds of submissions
• You have ~30 seconds to grab their interest
• They sort into "A pile" (excited to read) and "B pile" (chore to read)

Find Your One Startling Sentence

• Boil your entire talk down to ONE compelling statement
• It should make the reader's eyes open wide
• Be specific and concrete — vague claims are forgettable
• Don't be afraid to make a bold, falsifiable claim

Keep It Short and Clear

• Short abstracts get into the "A pile"
• Resist the temptation to argue for your conclusion in the abstract
• Let the abstract create intrigue — make them want to hear the full talk
• Don't try to cram everything about your topic into the abstract

The Full Talk Structure (for context)

When the abstract needs to hint at depth, remember the full talk should follow:

1. Problem — Make the audience understand and believe it's important
2. Solution — Your approach to solving it
3. Defense — Evidence that it actually works
4. Related work — What makes your approach novel

Abstract Checklist

• Follows the four-sentence structure (or close to it)
• Has one clear, startling sentence/claim
• Written for experts who need to be intrigued quickly
• Short and scannable (not a wall of text)
• Makes the reader want to know "how can they say that?"
• Clear benefit/takeaway for attendees
• Avoids jargon that only you understand
• Problem is relatable and important

Common Mistakes to Avoid

• "The Foo System In All Its Glory" — Trying to include everything instead of focusing on one hook
• Vague claims — "This talk will be interesting" vs. specific value
• Arguing in the abstract — Save the proof for the talk itself
• Writing to the general audience first — Get past the committee first!
• Playing it safe — Boring, hedged statements don't grab attention

Refinement Process

When refining an existing abstract:

1. Identify the startling sentence — if you can't find one, that's the problem
2. Check the four-sentence structure — is anything missing?
3. Cut ruthlessly — every word should earn its place
4. Read it as a tired reviewer — does it make you want to learn more?