4 ms·
> well, we have some tweaks that didn’t make it into the paper. Every single time I've tried to implement a newish, reasonably complicated algorithm from a pap
by flatline 11y ago
> well, we have some tweaks that didn’t make it into the paper.
Every single time I've tried to implement a newish, reasonably complicated algorithm from a paper and contacted the authors when I've run into trouble, this is the reply I've gotten. How is it not normal? It's research after all, and if you've worked in research you should have a good idea how the paper mill works.
- brown9-2 11y agoBut is it expected?
- vidarh 11y agoI think your response here is a perfect example of what the article rants about. It may seem normal to you and people with a "good idea how the paper mill works", but it is absolutely insane from the point of view of a lot (hopefully most...) people outside of that bubble, who would likely mostly expect the results in a paper to at least be possible to replicate with the information in the paper.
- s73v3r 11y ago"How is it not normal?" Because how the hell is anyone supposed to validate their findings?