<p>I have three papers, one from SWC 04, one from SWC 05, and one from this year’s STS. In order of how well-written they are, we have</p>
<p>SWC05 < STS < SWC04</p>
<p>However, in terms of how good the project is, we have</p>
<p>STS < SWC04 < SWC05</p>
<p>Which paper should I send? If I send the SWC 04 one, will it seem like I haven’t done anything good since then (SWC 04 is my biggest award)? </p>
<p>[Just to clarify, I ask the question about SWC 04 not because I’m partial to the paper, but just because I’m wondering. I really have NO partiality.]</p>
<p>I have just submitted. I did win an in-house award with a more rudimentary version of it at RSI, so it’s not useless. I like it less than the other two, I guess, but the “world” probably likes it just as much (i.e., the field is a “hot” one).</p>
<p>Ohhh, right, STS is later, sorry for forgetting.</p>
<p>Hmm… submit SWC04 and STS. The latter shows you are capable of good work as a sole author (I gather you are the sole author) and the RSI best paper/best presentation awards are pretty prestigious, actually. You are also submitting something you did within the last year, which is good.</p>
<p>Each application is read by an admissions staff member, an undergraduate student (often knowledgeable in the field) and a faculty member (who will often be asked to read applications containing research in his field, and may well talk to colleagues about it to evaluate it.)</p>