tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post7606793235052932486..comments2023-09-27T07:44:19.769-04:00Comments on Sabine Hossenfelder: Backreaction: Peer Review IVSabine Hossenfelderhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06151209308084588985noreply@blogger.comBlogger30125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-20661496357385180132008-02-20T19:45:00.000-05:002008-02-20T19:45:00.000-05:00"Dear Prof. Hossenfelder, Today I read your i..."Dear Prof. Hossenfelder,<BR/> Today I read your interesting paper on X. I want to draw your attention to my interesting paper(s) on Y. EULA .type Agreement follows:<BR/><BR/>'By reading this paper, the reader is authorised to enjoy and even reuse the arguments without quotation. Hereby the authors explicitly refuse any kind of claim against the reader. The reader is authorised to deny evenAlejandro Riverohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16181521111080562335noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-79294745737598242302008-02-10T15:27:00.000-05:002008-02-10T15:27:00.000-05:00I don't know why some people have this zeal to att...I don't know why some people have this zeal to attain the highest possible citation count. Most departments are smart enough to judge for themselves which papers are worthwhile and which are fluff.<BR/><BR/>For instance, publishing some semi obvious continuation of a new hot topic that is guarenteed to be be a citatation monster, but is ultimately trivial (eg in the words of Joker from ResonanceAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-45549365932636848832008-02-09T11:47:00.000-05:002008-02-09T11:47:00.000-05:00Hi Bee,Just as a one further related aside as to t...Hi Bee,<BR/><BR/>Just as a one further related aside as to this Newton quote. It was only a couple of years back when reading some English philosophy from the Renaissance that I discovered that Newton plagiarized when he said this. For a quote of <A HREF="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Burton_%28scholar%29" REL="nofollow">Robert Burton</A> (1577-1640) reads:<BR/><BR/>“A dwarf standing on Phil Warnellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15671311338712852659noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-12108612687180257342008-02-08T21:25:00.000-05:002008-02-08T21:25:00.000-05:00Hi Bee,"If I don't see farther than others, it's b...Hi Bee,<BR/><BR/>"If I don't see farther than others, it's because giants are standing on my shoulders."<BR/><BR/>There are days when I feel like that one on the bottom:-) <BR/><BR/>“I am sorry if I am sometimes very brief”<BR/><BR/>Now I’m embarrassed for there is no reason to be sorry for I never did take any offense. Besides as a good scientist I would expect you to incorporate Occam’ razor Phil Warnellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15671311338712852659noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-86096623431499371142008-02-08T13:03:00.000-05:002008-02-08T13:03:00.000-05:00Hi Phil,Ha. Do you know this one: "If I don't see ...Hi Phil,<BR/><BR/>Ha. Do you know this one: "If I don't see farther than others, it's because giants are standing on my shoulders." Can't recall where I got that from, but unfortunately not my idea.<BR/><BR/>Besides, what I actually meant to say with my no-liner is that I do read all of the comments, but I just don't have the time to reply to all of them. So I want to say, I appreciate your Sabine Hossenfelderhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06151209308084588985noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-29733858031461979142008-02-07T21:00:00.000-05:002008-02-07T21:00:00.000-05:00Hi Bee & Neil,“Thanks. What's the right adjective ...Hi Bee & Neil,<BR/><BR/>“Thanks. What's the right adjective then, 'few people'?”<BR/><BR/>I feel somewhat better now for at first I thought it might have been akin to what Newton said to Hooke which was:<BR/><BR/>“If I have seen further it is by standing on the shoulders of giants.”<BR/><BR/>I suspect the no-liner equates to when someone is being ignored as when they deserve to be. I think more Phil Warnellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15671311338712852659noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-58419943655777908512008-02-07T16:45:00.000-05:002008-02-07T16:45:00.000-05:00Yes Bee, the correct phrase would be "few people n...Yes Bee, the correct phrase would be "few people notice them." [or "it."] Using "it" is OK if you refer to your one-liners as a singular abstraction! That is like saying, "We know more about the nucleus than we used to, but it is still a mystery in many ways" etc. (Well, is "it," BTW?)Neil Bateshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04564859009749481136noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-15217617634892103712008-02-07T16:29:00.000-05:002008-02-07T16:29:00.000-05:00Hi Neil,Thanks. What's the right adjective then, '...Hi Neil,<BR/><BR/>Thanks. What's the right adjective then, 'few people'? <BR/><BR/>The 'no-liner' is not a typo, it was supposed to be a joke.<BR/><BR/>Best,<BR/><BR/>B.Sabine Hossenfelderhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06151209308084588985noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-90979328890654563662008-02-07T16:25:00.000-05:002008-02-07T16:25:00.000-05:00Bee, for future reference, I think what you meant ...Bee, for future reference, I think what you meant was, not very many people notice your one-("no" ?) liners? As written, it seems to mean, only small people notice them. Or you could easily just be kidding, but English can have odd complications even for a well-educated foreigner.Neil Bateshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04564859009749481136noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-7658824361500700532008-02-07T10:38:00.000-05:002008-02-07T10:38:00.000-05:00Hi Phil:I'm especially skilled with the no-liner. ...Hi Phil:<BR/><BR/>I'm especially skilled with the no-liner. Sadly, little people notice it.<BR/><BR/>Best,<BR/><BR/>B.Sabine Hossenfelderhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06151209308084588985noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-60709208629465475242008-02-07T10:19:00.000-05:002008-02-07T10:19:00.000-05:00Hi Thomas,social versus scientific citation. Self-...Hi Thomas,<BR/><BR/><I>social versus scientific citation. Self-explanatory,</I><BR/><BR/>True, I actually like this better. I had a picture in mind with the horizontal/vertical but it didn't quite work out. If you think about a citation tree you'll figure why. Thanks, I think if I bring the topic up again I will use your suggestion. Best,<BR/><BR/>B.Sabine Hossenfelderhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06151209308084588985noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-47847874548472109742008-02-07T09:33:00.000-05:002008-02-07T09:33:00.000-05:00As a referee I do sometimes ask for self-citations...As a referee I do sometimes ask for <I>self</I>-citations to be reduced. But not being much of a bandwagon-hopper I don't often get papers to referee that contain useless monster reference lists like the unparticle ones. <BR/><BR/>I would be even more explicit in labeling the extremes: <I>social</I> versus <I>scientific</I> citation. Self-explanatory, whereas 'horizontal/vertical' is not so Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-85968588182081792302008-02-06T22:23:00.000-05:002008-02-06T22:23:00.000-05:00Hi Bee,See: CitebaseWith the reply to me and Neil ...Hi Bee,<BR/><BR/>See: Citebase<BR/><BR/>With the reply to me and Neil you demonstrate you are becoming skilled with the art of the one liner. So I thought I’d share one from the King of one liners.<BR/><BR/>“He willed his body to science. Science is contesting the will.”<BR/>-Henny Youngmen<BR/><BR/>Seriously, I wasn’t aware that they were already rating/ranking papers in search engine like Phil Warnellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15671311338712852659noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-78423217465048140362008-02-06T18:24:00.000-05:002008-02-06T18:24:00.000-05:00Hi Bee - I understand what you are saying. I thin...Hi Bee - I understand what you are saying. I think earlier I read through your post too quickly.<BR/><BR/>Cheers.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-43414142565871315412008-02-06T16:09:00.000-05:002008-02-06T16:09:00.000-05:00Hi Changcho: Please read the context and my commen...Hi Changcho: <BR/><BR/>Please read the context and my comment above. What I tried to say is that these citations are useless if they are just listed as 'further stuff []', I would have no problems with detailed introductions that would explain ref [] did that and ref [] added this and ref [] did something nobody knew what to do with, and ref [] criticised ref [] etc. (The question would then be, Sabine Hossenfelderhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06151209308084588985noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-5330007454360286162008-02-06T16:00:00.000-05:002008-02-06T16:00:00.000-05:00Imho, I don't think that I agree that 'horizontal'...Imho, I don't think that I agree that 'horizontal' citations (to use your terminology) are not needed. I think these can be helpful when used in moderation (especially in, say, the introductory part of your paper). Why go search on Google when you are reading the paper right then and there?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-64171349220650258802008-02-06T13:31:00.000-05:002008-02-06T13:31:00.000-05:00The tendency of these trends though is to become m...<I>The tendency of these trends though is to become more pronounced the better people 'optimize' their strategies.</I><BR/><BR/>I was trying to think of some associative correlations besides the one you choose in terms of 2yrs previous.<BR/><BR/><B>The Disaster Scenarios in the LHC</B><BR/><BR/>An evolution of discourse is based on the science that will either support or dismissed the fears that PlatoHagelhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00849253658526056393noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-9303007927324355522008-02-06T13:03:00.000-05:002008-02-06T13:03:00.000-05:00Hi Plato:I am not carrying anybodies torch. The fa...Hi Plato:<BR/><BR/>I am not carrying anybodies torch. The fact that I'm not the only one noticing these developments have severe drawbacks is the only source of my optimism. I find it quite astonishing, again and again, how many people complain about 'the system' but then go an willingly work in it, shrugging shoulders and saying 'that's just the way it is'.<BR/><BR/>who is involved with Sabine Hossenfelderhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06151209308084588985noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-68042826833287613112008-02-06T12:54:00.000-05:002008-02-06T12:54:00.000-05:00Citebase is currently only an experimental demonst...<A HREF="http://www.citebase.org/abstract?id=oai%3AarXiv.org%3Ahep-ph%2F0703260" REL="nofollow" TITLE="Search Citebase"><I>Citebase is currently only an experimental demonstration. Users are cautioned not to use it for academic evaluation yet. Citation coverage and analysis is incomplete and hit coverage and analysis is both incomplete and noisy.</I></A><BR/><BR/>I see the challenge now. <BR/><BRPlatoHagelhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00849253658526056393noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-33974287543205721452008-02-06T10:49:00.000-05:002008-02-06T10:49:00.000-05:00something else that I just remembered: some years ...something else that I just remembered: some years ago I received an email saying 'thanks for citing my paper A. but if you cite A you also have to cite my papers B, C, and D'. upon which i took out citation A and wrote back I considered what he said, and decided citing A is unnecessary, so I wouldn't cite any of his papers. never heard of that guy again.Sabine Hossenfelderhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06151209308084588985noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-85572518240653713972008-02-06T10:32:00.000-05:002008-02-06T10:32:00.000-05:00interesting, i too do this, though I preferably us...interesting, i too do this, though I preferably use German (\cite{bloederdepp} \cite{quatschkopp} \cite{murkspaper}). one never knows who downloads the source code, though the risk is half of the fun ;-)Sabine Hossenfelderhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06151209308084588985noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-24375795181410082612008-02-06T10:29:00.000-05:002008-02-06T10:29:00.000-05:00One technique I learned from a more senior collabo...One technique I learned from a more senior collaborator to reduce the amount of anger due to these quasi automated "cite me" emails is to include the reference without ever looking at the paper. This can be very satisfying. <BR/><BR/>Additional points can be earned by attaching the \cite at useless places like "Physics has also been considered in\cite{Moron:90xy}." or attaching it to random Roberthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06634377111195468947noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-16265742025524255572008-02-06T08:55:00.000-05:002008-02-06T08:55:00.000-05:00Hi Neil,See: UnparticlesHi Phil,See: CitebaseBest,...Hi Neil,<BR/><BR/><A HREF="http://backreaction.blogspot.com/2007/09/unparticles.html" REL="nofollow">See: Unparticles</A><BR/><BR/>Hi Phil,<BR/><BR/><A HREF="http://www.citebase.org/abstract?id=oai%3AarXiv.org%3Ahep-ph%2F0703260" REL="nofollow">See: Citebase</A><BR/><BR/>Best,<BR/><BR/>B.Sabine Hossenfelderhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06151209308084588985noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-36518548522816009812008-02-06T07:43:00.000-05:002008-02-06T07:43:00.000-05:00Hi Bee,“In times where keyword searches and 'cited...Hi Bee,<BR/><BR/>“In times where keyword searches and 'cited by' queries are possible, horizontal citations are unnecessary. They have however the side-effect of causing a positive feedback on fashionable topics that can distort objectivity.”<BR/><BR/>The whole thing boils down to what papers have high relevance and which do not. It is interesting to note that when Google’s Page & Grin faced Phil Warnellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15671311338712852659noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-39143032791091127062008-02-05T21:04:00.000-05:002008-02-05T21:04:00.000-05:00PS: What really is "unparticle physics"? I looked ...PS: What really is "unparticle physics"? I looked at http://physorg.com/news100753984.html and I still don't really get it. Like the Stephen Wolfram stuff? What does anyone think of all that, and is it mostly just a new "interpretation" with no new predictions? Does it fit in with Max Tegmark-ish ideas that the universe literally "is" just a "mathematical structure"? txNeil Bateshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04564859009749481136noreply@blogger.com