4 ms·

How come the three papers that the author cites as examples of groundbreaking work have 2 citations between them? Is this the norm in computer systems?

robotresearcher 10y ago
They were published this year. They'll be cited next year if they are useful. There's a 6-9 month delay between paper submission and publication.
- roel_v 10y ago
  So how does he know they're so great then? In academic career progress contexts, citations are what matters. If your 'great' papers have 2 citations, they're objectively not great - in fact, they're pretty shit even. They might become 'great' next year, time will tell - but making a case of how great a researcher you are with a paper selection like that is, well, not very smart.
  - robotresearcher 10y ago
    If they are new, they are neither proven great or shit. Like a new novel or work of art, or any IP. The author is proposing that people read those papers becaus he is proud of them. Nothing wrong with that.
    - roel_v 10y ago
      No, not true. He's arguing he's an asset to the university, and one of his arguments is his publishing track record. In that context, there are two way papers are 'good': they are published in Nature or The Lancet, or they have high citation counts. Whether a paper has the potential to get lots of citations doesn't count for anything. Likewise, if the content is super out of this world great, but nobody has cited it - the paper is shit. In all sorts of other contexts, obviously there are many ways in which something can be good. In the specific way he used it, there is a very well-defined and objective standard, and he fails it.
      - phdysfunction 10y ago
        Why do you hate this guy? In most areas of computer science, certain value of publications is attributed to the venue where they are published, which isn't necessarily science or lancet. His RV work got the best paper award, which is a good indicator of quality and potential. The other two papers are in reasonably good venues. I think that his publications record isn't great, and that and his personality are perhaps what lead to his tenure's outcomes, but that's not a point you are making.
  - tnecniv 10y ago
    There's other, less public ways to get feedback. You'll get positive review, people at conferences will express interest, etc. But yes, only time will tell at the end of the day.
Upvoter33 10y ago
When he says they are groundbreaking, he is just announcing to the world that he thinks well of them. hyperbole seems to be the norm for this young fellow...

robotresearcher 10y ago

They were published this year. They'll be cited next year if they are useful. There's a 6-9 month delay between paper submission and publication.

roel_v 10y ago
So how does he know they're so great then? In academic career progress contexts, citations are what matters. If your 'great' papers have 2 citations, they're objectively not great - in fact, they're pretty shit even. They might become 'great' next year, time will tell - but making a case of how great a researcher you are with a paper selection like that is, well, not very smart.
- robotresearcher 10y ago
  If they are new, they are neither proven great or shit. Like a new novel or work of art, or any IP. The author is proposing that people read those papers becaus he is proud of them. Nothing wrong with that.
  - roel_v 10y ago
    No, not true. He's arguing he's an asset to the university, and one of his arguments is his publishing track record. In that context, there are two way papers are 'good': they are published in Nature or The Lancet, or they have high citation counts. Whether a paper has the potential to get lots of citations doesn't count for anything. Likewise, if the content is super out of this world great, but nobody has cited it - the paper is shit. In all sorts of other contexts, obviously there are many ways in which something can be good. In the specific way he used it, there is a very well-defined and objective standard, and he fails it.
    - phdysfunction 10y ago
      Why do you hate this guy? In most areas of computer science, certain value of publications is attributed to the venue where they are published, which isn't necessarily science or lancet. His RV work got the best paper award, which is a good indicator of quality and potential. The other two papers are in reasonably good venues. I think that his publications record isn't great, and that and his personality are perhaps what lead to his tenure's outcomes, but that's not a point you are making.
- tnecniv 10y ago
  There's other, less public ways to get feedback. You'll get positive review, people at conferences will express interest, etc. But yes, only time will tell at the end of the day.

Upvoter33 10y ago

When he says they are groundbreaking, he is just announcing to the world that he thinks well of them. hyperbole seems to be the norm for this young fellow...