4 ms·
Since the content is way, way above my head, I'll only comment by saying that I find it quite annoying how many academic papers don't have a date on the front p
by lunchladydoris 10y ago
Since the content is way, way above my head, I'll only comment by saying that I find it quite annoying how many academic papers don't have a date on the front page. It's a small thing, but can help to establish context.
- tauchunfall 10y agoThis paper seems to be a working draft. But yes, the date of the draft on the front page could be very useful.
- aegonis 10y agoThe homepage of the author confirms that it is a draft from April 2016: http://www.cis.upenn.edu/~jpaykin/ http://www.cis.upenn.edu/~jpaykin/
- y7 10y agoI agree that this is annoying and happens all too often. In this case, the filename contains 2016, and the PDF metadata suggests the documented was created on 6 May 2016.
- brudgers 10y agoOne trick I picked up somewhere in the days when access to papers was by xerox'd copy (which is in the post mimeograph era) is to look at the references. The approximate date of the paper is that of the most recent reference (looks like 2015 here). Because journals want current research authors have an incentive to site the most recent work practical. Not that I disagree that dates on academic articles would be helpful...though I think it would tend to reflect publication rather than authorship which could be a couple of years difference.