[Tccc] Requesting open feedback to my work (Re: Promoting open on-line research)

Pars Mutaf pars.mutaf
Thu Nov 3 10:14:25 EDT 2011


On Thu, Nov 3, 2011 at 3:51 PM, Vida Rolland <vida at tmit.bme.hu> wrote:

> IMO, the IETF model cannot be extended to general paper reviewing. In the
> IETF there is a very limited number of internet drafts that are discussed
> by
> the community, as opposed to the tons of papers that are written each year
> by an increasing number of students and researchers from all over the
> world.
> What works for 100 drafts/year would not work for 100.000 papers/year, as
> simple as that.
>
> Also, in the IETF there is an incentive for people to polish a draft as
> much
> as possible, as there is a common interest to arrive to an RFC, and a
> correct one, as soon as possible. But it still takes several years for a
> draft to become an RFC, so it's not at all faster than a traditional
> journal
> publication. What would be the incentive in the case of scientific papers?
> Some papers would surely generate a nice on line discussion, but that would
> be probably the case for only 1% of the papers, and that is an optimistic
> forecast. What about the other 99% of the papers?
>

They need more work. If there are too many similar papers for example, they
may consider to work together. Reviewer are needed to make such "awakening"
comments publicly.

Pars


>
> If you want just to get fast feedback for your work, there are several ways
> to do it:
> - send it to your colleagues first;
> - send it to people you work with in some national or international
> projects;
> - send it to people you consider experts in the area, people whose work is
> referenced in your paper;
> - send it to Special Issues of some journals, they are much faster in
> reviewing;
> - post it publicly in an archive, if you wish. But why obliging everyone to
> use this latter solution?
>
> Cheers,
> Rolland Vida
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: tccc-bounces at lists.cs.columbia.edu [mailto:tccc-
> > bounces at lists.cs.columbia.edu] On Behalf Of Pars Mutaf
> > Sent: Thursday, November 03, 2011 12:50 PM
> > To: Sakib Pathan
> > Cc: touch at isi.edu; tccc at lists.cs.columbia.edu
> > Subject: Re: [Tccc] Requesting open feedback to my work (Re: Promoting
> open
> > on-line research)
> >
> > Addition to my last e-mail:
> >
> > What changes would you require in the petition to sign it?
> >
> > Pars
> >
> > On Thu, Nov 3, 2011 at 1:39 PM, Pars Mutaf <pars.mutaf at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Thu, Nov 3, 2011 at 12:56 PM, Sakib Pathan
> > <sakib.pathan at gmail.com>wrote:
> > >
> > >> Asking question is the way of clarifying doubt. All created things
> > >> following the laws of space and time must be flawed. Hence, both
> > >> current and the proposed systems will have flaws. While some of the
> > >> points mentioned here (
> > >> http://www.gopetition.com/petitions/replacing-scientific-conferences-
> > >> with-a-cheap-and-effic.html) seem to be reasonable, I see some
> critical
> > problems. May be I am again asking the same questions others already have
> put
> > forward.
> > >>
> > >> 1. Though the idea of "on-line archive" seems to be attractive, such
> > >> centralization in digital world could draw numerous numbers of
> > >> submissions to a single archive that could be again left for long time
> without
> > reviews!
> > >> How many "on-line archives" should be there?
> > >>
> > >> 2. If Step 3: "When the community and authors decide that the article
> > >> is ready for publication, the authors submit it to a journal using
> > >> the current system. The article is published with their names." is
> > >> followed, the same problem of taking long time exists. What is meant
> > >> by 'community'? How many people/scientists?
> > >>
> > >> 3. Previously it was noted that a scientific conference does not only
> > >> provide a forum for scientific researchers, but also many things
> > >> could be learnt from direct human-to-human communications that you
> > >> might not find in your own surroundings or in the digital world.
> > >> Sitting in from of the monitor does not give the idea how much a work
> > >> could scale to a different infrastructure and settings.
> > >>
> > >> 4. While blocking conference travel might save money, reduce carbon
> > >> emission, and provide other facilities, the learning from a different
> > >> setting or environment will be less or none, which will hamper the
> > >> actual scientific progress that could be applied overall for the
> mankind.
> > >>
> > >> *The better idea could be: *
> > >>
> > >> 1. Keep the conferences as they are now (online or physical). People
> > >> may or may not attend, local or international (based on capability).
> > >>
> > >> 2. Submit your works to the archive systems. If people are
> > >> interested, they will automatically read those. It would be rather
> > >> better to make some system that announces arrival of such-and-such
> > >> paper in the digital archive. We should have choice of topics so that
> > >> papers are notified to us using some filtering system. Then, I will
> > >> have choice to read it or not, comment it or not.
> > >>
> > >> 3. Naturally go for journals for publication.
> > >>
> > >>
> > > Yes this my opinion too.. We just need to augment archive systems with
> > > online discussion.
> > >
> > > Personally, if I see a paper in which I am interested I give feedback
> > > without waiting anything in return. This comes naturally from the need
> > > to talk about the topic. Because I like the topic.
> > >
> > > Cheers,
> > >
> > > Pars
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >> Best Regards,
> > >> Sakib
> > >> http://staff.iium.edu.my/sakib/
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> On Thu, Nov 3, 2011 at 5:46 PM, Pars Mutaf <pars.mutaf at gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > >>
> > >>> On Thu, Nov 3, 2011 at 11:17 AM, Emmanuel Lochin
> > >>> <emmanuel.lochin at gmail.com>wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>> > On 3 November 2011 09:45, Pars Mutaf <pars.mutaf at gmail.com> wrote:
> > >>> > > Hi Usman,
> > >>> > >
> > >>> > > The method you are suggesting means that we need to wait 6
> > >>> > > months for feedback (3-5 reviews).
> > >>> >
> > >>> > Hi Pars,
> > >>> >
> > >>> > Why do you think it would be faster with your proposal?
> > >>> > I saw that you requested a review for one of your paper, but how
> > >>> > long you expect to get real reviews? I mean, not from your
> > >>> > friends, colleagues or collaborators.
> > >>> > Who is going to stand whether the reviewer is skilled or not?
> > >>> > If the reviewer is not anonymous, who would risk to send a review
> > >>> > that might be qualified as bad by the author or another person?
> > >>> >
> > >>> > I think you should clearly expose the rules of your system, I
> > >>> > really do not understand how does it work.
> > >>> >
> > >>>
> > >>> Hi Emmanuel,
> > >>>
> > >>> Normally you should come with answer not questions (it is not only
> > >>> my idea).
> > >>> I mean: Question the current system not the new one to come.
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> http://www.gopetition.com/petitions/replacing-scientific-conferences
> > >>> -with-a-cheap-and-effic.html
> > >>> Pars
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> >
> > >>> > Regards,
> > >>> >
> > >>> > Emmanuel
> > >>> >
> > >>> >
> > >>> > > Pars
> > >>> > >
> > >>> > > On Thu, Nov 3, 2011 at 10:08 AM, Usman Ashraf <
> > >>> > m_usman_ashraf at hotmail.com>wrote:
> > >>> > >
> > >>> > >>  Dear All,
> > >>> > >>
> > >>> > >> Is there a point that I'm missing? why don't we just submit our
> > >>> work to
> > >>> > a
> > >>> > >> reputed journal for feedback?
> > >>> > >> Most reputed journals don't charge anything, don't cost as much
> > >>> > >> as conferences and provide us with a decent feedback.
> > >>> > >>
> > >>> > >> regards
> > >>> > >> Usman.
> > >>> > >>
> > >>> > >> > Date: Thu, 3 Nov 2011 09:43:11 +0200
> > >>> > >> > From: pars.mutaf at gmail.com
> > >>> > >> > To: touch at isi.edu
> > >>> > >> > CC: tccc at lists.cs.columbia.edu
> > >>> > >> > Subject: [Tccc] Requesting open feedback to my work (Re:
> > >>> > >> > Promoting
> > >>> > open
> > >>> > >> on-line research)
> > >>> > >>
> > >>> > >> >
> > >>> > >> > Hi all,
> > >>> > >> >
> > >>> > >> > Could you please send feedback for the following work. I
> > >>> > >> > don't
> > >>> want to
> > >>> > >> > submit it to conferences just for feedback. I would therefore
> > >>> > >> > need
> > >>> > your
> > >>> > >> > opinion:
> > >>> > >> >
> > >>> > >> > http://arxiv.org/abs/1103.5115
> > >>> > >> >
> > >>> > >> > Or, please point me to me to a list working on this kind of
> topic.
> > >>> > >> >
> > >>> > >> > Pars
> > >>> > >> >
> > >>> > >> > PS: Based on the below idea, this is a test for open research.
> > >>> > >> >
> > >>> > >> > On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 5:20 PM, Joe Touch <touch at isi.edu>
> wrote:
> > >>> > >> >
> > >>> > >> > >
> > >>> > >> > >
> > >>> > >> > > On 11/1/2011 11:37 PM, Pars Mutaf wrote:
> > >>> > >> > > ...
> > >>> > >> > >
> > >>> > >> > > Conferences may have the benefits that are listed above.
> > >>> > >> > > The
> > >>> > problem is
> > >>> > >> > >> being tied to conferences just for receiving feedback.
> > >>> > >> > >>
> > >>> > >> > >
> > >>> > >> > > It's useful to appreciate that it has always been possible
> > >>> > >> > > to
> > >>> write
> > >>> > >> drafts
> > >>> > >> > > and tech reports and post them - either via direct email,
> > >>> > >> > > or to
> > >>> > lists*
> > >>> > >> for
> > >>> > >> > > discussion or feedback.
> > >>> > >> > >
> > >>> > >> > > *This list in particular is intended for exactly this kind
> > >>> > >> > > of
> > >>> > >> discussion;
> > >>> > >> > > we are often overrun with CFPs, but they is NOT the primary
> > >>> > motivation
> > >>> > >> for
> > >>> > >> > > this list.*
> > >>> > >> > >
> > >>> > >> > > Joe (TCCC Chair)
> > >>> > >> > >
> > >>> > >> > > *it's more useful to post only the abstract, not the full
> > >>> > >> > > text
> > >>> or
> > >>> > PDF
> > >>> > >> FWIW.
> > >>> > >> > >
> > >>> > >> > > *there are many IEEE Comsoc TCs; it's always useful to post
> > >>> > >> > > your
> > >>> > ideas
> > >>> > >> to
> > >>> > >> > > the TC most specific to your work.
> > >>> > >> > >
> > >>> > >> > _______________________________________________
> > >>> > >> > IEEE Communications Society Tech. Committee on Computer
> > >>> Communications
> > >>> > >> > (TCCC) - for discussions on computer networking and
> communication.
> > >>> > >> > Tccc at lists.cs.columbia.edu
> > >>> > >> > https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/cucslists/listinfo/tccc
> > >>> > >>
> > >>> > > _______________________________________________
> > >>> > > IEEE Communications Society Tech. Committee on Computer
> > >>> Communications
> > >>> > > (TCCC) - for discussions on computer networking and
> communication.
> > >>> > > Tccc at lists.cs.columbia.edu
> > >>> > > https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/cucslists/listinfo/tccc
> > >>> > >
> > >>> >
> > >>> >
> > >>> >
> > >>> > --
> > >>> > "This email and any attachments are confidential. They may contain
> > >>> legally
> > >>> > privileged information or copyright material. You should not read,
> > >>> copy,
> > >>> > use
> > >>> > or disclose them without authorisation. If you are not an intended
> > >>> > recipient, please contact us at once by return email and then
> > >>> > delete
> > >>> both
> > >>> > messages. We do not accept liability in connection with computer
> > >>> > virus, data corruption, delay, interruption, unauthorised access
> > >>> > or
> > >>> unauthorised
> > >>> > amendment. This notice should not be removed"
> > >>> >
> > >>> _______________________________________________
> > >>> IEEE Communications Society Tech. Committee on Computer
> > >>> Communications
> > >>> (TCCC) - for discussions on computer networking and communication.
> > >>> Tccc at lists.cs.columbia.edu
> > >>> https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/cucslists/listinfo/tccc
> > >>>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> --
> > >> Al-Sakib Khan Pathan, Ph.D.
> > >> Assistant Professor & FYP Coordinator Department of Computer Science
> > >> Kulliyyah (Faculty) of Information and Communication Technology
> > >> International Islamic University Malaysia (IIUM)
> > >>
> > >> Jalan Gombak, 53100, Kuala Lumpur, MALAYSIA
> > >> Tel:  +603-61964000 Ext. 5653, Cell: +60163910754
> > >> E-Mails: spathan at ieee.org, sakib at iium.edu.my
> > >>
> > >> URLs:
> > >> http://staff.iium.edu.my/sakib/
> > >> https://sites.google.com/site/spathansite/
> > >>
> > >>
> > >
> > _______________________________________________
> > IEEE Communications Society Tech. Committee on Computer Communications
> > (TCCC) - for discussions on computer networking and communication.
> > Tccc at lists.cs.columbia.edu
> > https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/cucslists/listinfo/tccc
>
>



More information about the TCCC mailing list