• Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
  • Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!

Any electronics geezers ? peer review

Collapse
X
  •  
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Any electronics geezers ? peer review



    un be leivable


    so much for the vaunted peer review process
    (\__/)
    (>'.'<)
    ("")("") Born to Drink. Forced to Work

    #2
    Ah, but with some exceptions, these were conference proceedings, often not peer reviewed in the accepted sense, and they mainly appeared in China, where they do these things slightly differently. Out of over a million papers published annually, this is a fleabite.

    Peer Review ain't perfect, it weeds out a lot of the noise, but still the occasional howler slips through. Normally this is dealt with by a comment or rebuttal in the literature. Over time, the process is self-correcting, as this extreme example will be.
    Last edited by pjclarke; 25 February 2014, 16:27.
    My subconscious is annoying. It's got a mind of its own.

    Comment


      #3
      Labbé developed a way to automatically detect manuscripts composed by a piece of software called SCIgen, which randomly combines strings of words to produce fake computer-science papers. SCIgen was invented in 2005 by researchers at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) in Cambridge to prove that conferences would accept meaningless papers — and, as they put it, “to maximize amusement” (see ‘Computer conference welcomes gobbledegook paper’). A related program generates random physics manuscript titles on the satirical website arXiv vs. snarXiv. SCIgen is free to download and use, and it is unclear how many people have done so, or for what purposes. SCIgen’s output has occasionally popped up at conferences, when researchers have submitted nonsense papers and then revealed the trick.
      I love the way they admit they produced it as a way to take the p1ss and laugh at the comedy bollocks that some "vital" conference activities masquerade as.

      Comment


        #4
        Here's another one with made up graphs

        Global-scale temperature patterns and climate forcing over the past six centuries : Abstract : Nature
        I'm alright Jack

        Comment


          #5
          Originally posted by pjclarke View Post
          Ah, ... this is a fleabite.

          Peer Review ain't perfect, ....
          you are right. who cares about 50 parts per million


          er..wait..you do
          (\__/)
          (>'.'<)
          ("")("") Born to Drink. Forced to Work

          Comment


            #6
            Yes I do. Introducing a few ppm of a trace metal into glass is enough to turn it from clear to coloured, a few hundred ppm of greenhouse gasses in the atmosphere keeps the planet around 33 degrees warmer than it would be without them.

            Increase that concentration by a third and ....
            My subconscious is annoying. It's got a mind of its own.

            Comment


              #7


              he forgot to mention that water vapor is 100 times more powerful, so out of the zero temperature rises we have had over the last 17 years
              99% we cant take the blame for, 1% of the zero is our fault.

              no wait,.. 97% of the 1% is natural

              so 3% of the 1% of zero is all our fault


              funny how these tiny numbers only matter when they want to control us.
              (\__/)
              (>'.'<)
              ("")("") Born to Drink. Forced to Work

              Comment


                #8
                Yes, water vapour is a powerful greenhouse gas. But if you increase the amount of water vapour in the atmosphere, at constant temperature the excess just precipitates out in a matter of days. Unlike CO2 which once emitted hangs around for hundreds of years.

                And a warmer atmosphere holds more water vapour. So if the atmosphere warms, the humidity increases and the warming effect is amplified, a positive feedback. This has already been observed.

                Water-vapor climate feedback inferred from climate fluctuations, 2003&ndash;2008 - Dessler - 2008 - Geophysical Research Letters - Wiley Online Library
                My subconscious is annoying. It's got a mind of its own.

                Comment


                  #9


                  ah yes. that explains why it rains more in the summer and in the desert


                  (\__/)
                  (>'.'<)
                  ("")("") Born to Drink. Forced to Work

                  Comment


                    #10
                    Originally posted by EternalOptimist View Post


                    ah yes. that explains why it rains more in the summer and in the desert



                    Are you really that thick and ignorant? Warm air holds more moisture than cold air. That is one reason why as air passes over a mountain range and is cooled it can no longer hold as much moisture and so it rains / snows.

                    This is taught at pre-GCSE level, yet you seem to be ignorant of it.

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X