Indeed, I know about such papers. However, I wonder whether they would
affect the statistics very much. Such papers (from both the great ones
and the crackpots) may be too rare to have a significant effect. Has this
ever been studied? (01)
-- Ken (02)
On Sun, 19 Apr 2015, John F Sowa wrote: (03)
> On 4/19/2015 4:26 PM, kenb wrote:
>> Given that reviewers are not compensated and that there is no
>> assessment of the quality of the reviews, I am not at all surprised
>> by the lack of agreement. Given the lack of agreement and assessment
>> of quality, it is also not surprising that "best paper" awards are
>> largely meaningless.
>
> The issues are more complex. People with novel or unorthodox ideas
> in any field -- science, engineering, art, etc -- are often hard to
> distinguish from crackpots and con artists.
>
> There are countless stories of publishers that rejected great books,
> movie producers that rejected great stories, and business executives
> that rejected great inventions (xerography, for example).
>
> In an interdisciplinary field, it's hard for any reviewer to be
> able to evaluate novelties in every branch. Sometimes an author
> who has a great idea on the boundary between fields A and B will
> be rejected or given a mediocre evaluation by reviewers from both.
>
> The methods for evaluating the quality of journals and conferences
> put pressure on the organizers to attract lots of submissions so
> that they can have a high rejection rate. As a result, the bar
> for acceptance means a high average score from all reviewers.
>
> Some organizations recognize those issues. One solution is
> to *accept* any paper that receives both very strong acceptance
> scores from one or more reviewers and very strong rejection scores
> from others. That is usually a sign of a controversial topic.
>
> John
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
> Config Subscr: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/
> Unsubscribe: mailto:ontolog-forum-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
> Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
> To join: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?WikiHomePage#nid1J
>
> (04)
_________________________________________________________________
Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
Config Subscr: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/
Unsubscribe: mailto:ontolog-forum-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
To join: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?WikiHomePage#nid1J (05)
|