tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3722233.post1482204635873054661..comments2024-03-28T18:17:00.135-05:00Comments on Computational Complexity: Slow ScienceLance Fortnowhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06752030912874378610noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3722233.post-91616626336953228702013-01-14T08:10:26.796-06:002013-01-14T08:10:26.796-06:00In TCS (and specifically complexity) you may need ...In TCS (and specifically complexity) you may need a certain amount, say two-three papers per year, but their quality is extremely important. Much more than their quantity. If you don't publish in first-tier conferences and journals and if your papers are not deep enough, do not address the big questions, or are not sophisticated or innovative enough, then you're not going to make it in any reasonably good school, let alone how much you publish.ToC researchernoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3722233.post-20713033387954692252013-01-11T13:42:30.847-06:002013-01-11T13:42:30.847-06:00The problem is that you need an X amount, not of a...The problem is that you need an X amount, not of a certain quality. This forced horse-race is doing more damage to science than it should. It is much easier to measure the number X of papers than the quality of the paper. Program managers and higher-ups will tend to take the easier route, or favor things that get media attention as opposed to a high quality paper on a difficult concept. The quality of a paper is measured based on a collective vote by peers (on a short time scale) or the impact accumulated over years (on the long time scale), but only exceptional papers get a collective vote at all. But even a positive collective vote is not a guarantee for long-term impact. I think there is always a thread of slow science going on, but it is embedded in the noise of the fast "science". Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3722233.post-9563427019447770972013-01-10T13:36:32.888-06:002013-01-10T13:36:32.888-06:00There are no incentives in CS for slow science. Th...There are no incentives in CS for slow science. The reality is that you need X amount of papers before you graduate to get a job and you need Y amount of papers to get tenure. If we change how people are evaluated then people will work differently.<br /><br />There are of course people who have done very well with few papers but that is a very risky strategy. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3722233.post-22039865806302999552013-01-10T10:30:40.706-06:002013-01-10T10:30:40.706-06:00Grigori Perelman's slow science was done after...Grigori Perelman's slow science was done after the Internet revolution, so that is an example of a slow science success in the new age.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3722233.post-53445799481907400422013-01-10T10:27:27.744-06:002013-01-10T10:27:27.744-06:00Calvin: "You know how Einstein got bad grades...<b>Calvin:</b> "<b><a href="http://24.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lv3huazXFO1qeybpro1_500.gif" rel="nofollow">You know how Einstein got bad grades as a kid? Well <i>mine</i> are even <i>worse</i>!</a></b>"John Sidleshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16286860374431298556noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3722233.post-56006532742199436642013-01-10T07:22:07.409-06:002013-01-10T07:22:07.409-06:00You already have several posts on your blog on var...You already have several posts on your blog on various breakthrough results (which sceptical commenters often call "breakthough results").<br />Wouldn't they deserve to be considered successes of slow science ?Pascalhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14201150679841329835noreply@blogger.com