Great Idea, but I don't assume that the conferences and journals have the courage for change. I think they could fear that they will have less power in the end since great changes may have great risks.
Great Idea, but I don't assume that the conferences and journals have the courage for change. I think they could fear that they will have less power in the end since great changes may have great risks.
Separating the paper is similar to separating the work. Clearly it works there, the hard part to grapple is making sure people know what's out there, and how they all link to each other.
This has been flagged as spam show
Great Idea, but I don't assume that the conferences and journals have the courage for change. I think they could fear that they will have less power in the end since great changes may have great risks.
The best would be an experiment.
brubelsabs 10 months ago
Great Idea, but I don't assume that the conferences and journals have the courage for change. I think they could fear that they will have less power in the end since great changes may have great risks.
The best would be an experiment.
brubelsabs 10 months ago
Brilliant
bobmartian 11 months ago
This is pretty much a description of large software engineering firms:
- Managers/Execs/Customers : Introduction + Prob Statements
- Tech Directors/Tech Leads : Prob Statement + High Level Solution
- Tech leads/Sr. Engineers : Detailed Method + Algorithm
- Sr. Engineers/Engineers : Algorithm + Experiment.
Separating the paper is similar to separating the work. Clearly it works there, the hard part to grapple is making sure people know what's out there, and how they all link to each other.
codemac 11 months ago
I wrote down a refined proposal of the idea. It is available online:
PaperBricks: An Alternative to Complete-Story Peer Reviewing
arxiv.org/pdf/1102.3523v1
Jens
jensdit 1 year ago