Does tier 1 or tier 2 depend on hardness of problem? I have seen that many researchers from application side of computer science publish in ICALP (tier 1 conference ), where as only very few people in theory side publish in a top tier conference. For an example to me it appears that there are many researcher's works in theory like complexity theory publish their papers in tier 2 and tier 3 and only a few ( stars ) publish in a tier 1.

Question : Is it true that publishing anything in theory in tier 2 ( let's say ) is equivalent to publishing something in tier 1 in application side?

For an reference I have used this website : http://www.conferenceranks.com/#data
Is it true that publishing anything in theory in tier 2 ( let's say ) is equivalent to publishing something in tier 1 in application side?


Answer: No. It is not true.

I assume that you mean to say "Theory" means "Theoretical Computer Science" that includes areas such as Automata Theory, Algoriths, Computational Complexity, Learning Theory. And, "application side" meaning to "some areas that uses concepts" such as Machine Learning, Computer Vision etc.

Such a comparison is not possible. And, as far as I know, there is no venue or organization that compare two people from two different research fields compare on the aspect of their publishing venue. That would be highly ambiguous.

These conferences are meant for their own fields. For example, application side of Computer Science such as Machine Learning or Neural Processing have their Tier-1 conferences such as ICML, NIPS etc. For Theoretical Computer Science, we have ICALP, SODA, MFCS.