tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3722233.post3988126252359540708..comments2024-03-27T19:58:17.387-05:00Comments on Computational Complexity: Ordering BeautyLance Fortnowhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06752030912874378610noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3722233.post-40750233583078167202021-04-17T20:21:56.472-05:002021-04-17T20:21:56.472-05:00Nice log entry. (+1) for mentioning Diego.
Two con...Nice log entry. (+1) for mentioning Diego.<br />Two concerns.<br />[1] circularity.<br />If we already assume there are three<br />categories of entries, definite accept, definite reject,<br />and randomized accept, then we already<br />admitted that there is some absolute ordering<br />imposed.<br />[2] Randomization, however conducted, in the ultimate<br />scheme will also always be biased -- aka biased on the <br />pseudorandom number generators chosen. <br /><br /><br />EGnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3722233.post-81921540012167389512021-04-16T14:09:28.205-05:002021-04-16T14:09:28.205-05:00Great idea, please try to make it happen. It is im...Great idea, please try to make it happen. It is important that computer scientists take the lesson that randomness can be very powerful into the real world where it matters.Jakitohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08235089048981338795noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3722233.post-40705124608479161262021-04-15T14:17:33.887-05:002021-04-15T14:17:33.887-05:00One new option to add toward better fairness, tran...One new option to add toward better fairness, transparency, and competition is to publish the list of rejected papers with access links.computationalisthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13876886980860698327noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3722233.post-47243154660005311162021-04-15T12:41:26.220-05:002021-04-15T12:41:26.220-05:00If you do it at random there may still be some deb...If you do it at random there may still be some debates on the edges:<br /><br />Is this paper OBVIOULSY GOOD or should it go into the random pile?<br /><br />Is this paper OBVIOUSLY not-worthy or should it go into the random pile.<br /><br />This is not an objection, just an observation. <br /><br />----------------<br />Another thought- from what I have seen the number of papers that are worthy of FILL IN YOUR FAVORITE PRESIGE CONF has skyrocketed. Multipl sessions help, but Lance is right-- if its going to be online anyway<br />than the usual constraints don't hold and we could let more papers in.<br />How many? Thats a harder question if you want to maintain some notino of prestige conference (and maybe you don't).gasarchhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03004932739846901628noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3722233.post-89115649780530888082021-04-15T12:07:02.154-05:002021-04-15T12:07:02.154-05:00... why not just accept that 40% as "poster-o...... why not just accept that 40% as "poster-only" papers? Or, do a lottery with Pr[accept] = 1?Seriously, though...noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3722233.post-8518689558769944352021-04-15T10:55:55.497-05:002021-04-15T10:55:55.497-05:00I agree wrt randomizing! It seems more fair and wo...I agree wrt randomizing! It seems more fair and would make the job of the PC less arduous. A similar approach seems applicable to undergraduate admission to top colleges. Ivy League colleges, for instance, often say that they could fill several (essentially indistinguishable) classes in any given year. Why not have three groups -- accept; not accept; and lottery? And...let folks know when they made it to the lottery.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com