11 ms·
HN-like math research discussion for Ph.D.s
- gus_massa 8y agoDoes this support $\LaTeX$ code in the titles and comments?
- whunting 8y agoYes
- micahlopez 8y agolooks like it does
- th0br0 8y agoWhat does sth like this need 'leaders' (i.e. rankings) for? Isn't it exactly the lack of such rankings that makes HN so nice?
- contradictioned 8y agoWhat else is there? Is there an equivalent for CS research?
- whunting 8y agoML research falls into stat which is covered by the site. Other CS coverage is on the way
- AlexanderDhoore 8y agoLambda the ultimate? http://lambda-the-ultimate.org/ http://lambda-the-ultimate.org/
- vinay427 8y agoBrowsing the discussions and research papers sections of that site, it seems great for programming languages. However, that's only a small fraction of CS research.
- lainon 8y agohttps://paperkast.com/ https://paperkast.com/ For papers from all disciplines
- djsumdog 8y agoInteresting, another board using the Lobster engine.
- znpy 8y agoCool, how is it implemented ? Did you customize the news app from the arc repository or have you implemented it from scratch ?
- whunting 8y agoPHP from total scratch, I'm actually thinking of open sourcing the project
- explore 8y agoThat would be great, thank you! Cf. https://github.com/lobsters/lobsters https://github.com/lobsters/lobsters
- djsumdog 8y agoHaha, I was going to mention lobsters. I don't understand why everyone tries to re-implement HN. I guess the interface is pretty minimalist, simplistic and recognizable, but Lobster just has so many more useful features and is pretty mature. I'd highly recommend it rather than try and reinvent the wheel.
- usgroup 8y agoThis feels a bit overly specialised, and the average article is hard. I’m sure a maths researcher can handle it and all but it does seem rather taxing. I think for something like HN to be broadly interesting it needs volume and variety, because people’s interests are a long tail phenomena. I imagine that is probably true for maths too.
- mkl 8y ago> I’m sure a maths researcher can handle it No, not at all. Each maths researcher will understand (and care about) only a fraction of these. Maths research (like most subjects) is broken into highly specialised subfields, and experts in one often cannot readily understand research in others. New research papers are the cutting edge of the field, pushing out the boundary between known maths and unknown maths, and this boundary is huge. Things there are understood by very few people, at first just those who developed them, and the prerequisites for understanding any individual area of new maths are substantial. Known maths is also huge, far too big for any one person to understand it all. Source: have maths PhD.
- whunting 8y agoIndeed, that's why you can filter by category (e.g. math.NT for number theory). You can access the category by clicking on it at the end of each submission title
- roenxi 8y agoMathematics has a problem that also crops up on the fringes of programming; if a genius creates something at the limits of their understanding it is typically very hard to follow. Academics as a whole doesn't really tackle the issue of taking knowledge and bedding it down into digestible form. Individually a lot of people do great work, but as a body they don't seem to see as that as their role. So far the solution is to throw clever people at academic papers and assume they will sort out something comprehensible as they go. It always struck me as a very hard, very high-value problem. How do we measure ease-of-learning in a systemic way? Can we cheaply and reliably rate one explanation of a topic as superior to another of the same material?
- markkm 8y agoThe research mathematics community on the internet is fairly small, and a lot of them are over at MathOverflow, math.SE, and personal blogs. What does this site offer that would lure people away from them?
- nilkn 8y agoI imagine the main differentiator would be open-ended discussion that's not necessarily trying to answer a well-defined question (or any question at all for that matter). Stack Exchange and MathOverflow are both fairly bad at supporting this at best and openly hostile towards it at worst.
- meuk 8y agoIt's directly contradictory to their goal, since the goal is trying to answer well-defined questions.
- nilkn 8y agoThat's fine, but it doesn't change the fact that the sites are very ill-suited to many sorts of discussion that should then be handled by other sites.
- philipov 8y agoNone of the articles on the front page have even a single comment.
- nilkn 8y agoThat's a separate issue. The content here appears far too specialized and restricted even for math PhDs (while I don't have a PhD, I do have an extensive background in math and have published research).
- throwawaymath 8y agoYeah but the /r/math subreddit is already very good for that, and is well moderated. There are plenty of tenured professors from excellent math departments around the world contributing to discussion there.
- ksynwa 8y agoDoes anyone know of a website like this but for economics?
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]
- HNLurker2 8y agoHn succeeded in spite of his CMS not because of it
- mazsa 8y agoSearch is hidden behind registration wall AND I was not allowed to register (without affiliation). You should open search or registration.
- whunting 8y agoAgree on search, it is now open for non users. Affiliation is to avoid content dilution. Any alternative ideas are welcome (and as you can see with search, implemented)
- mazsa 8y agoGreat, thank you.
- jowdones 8y agoIdea: die in a fire. Really, go f yourself with your hardcore authoritarian censorship right from the beginning. HN is bad enough (and I bet you a month's salary they'll obliterate my post) but at least they allow SOME level of free expression. You on the other hand represent the most disgusting essence of human wickedness disguised as elitism.
- keldaris 8y agoBy dispensing with even the pretense of elementary civility you've demonstrated exactly why some measure of censorship is often crucial.
- deleted 8y ago
- dragon96 8y agoI'm a recent math graduate, working for a couple years before going back for a PhD. I'm a little sad about the affiliation requirement because I'd really like to be able to read and ask questions, even if I am a fool (relative to the rest of the community). As someone who does not get to work in an academic setting or regularly attend conferences, I wish I could still have opportunities to participate in these communities. I don't know if Hessix was meant to include people like me, but I would really love to be a part of it.
- xorand 8y agoWho are you? I can't find any information about who made Hessix or who is Hessix.
- amelius 8y agoIt seems the whois information is protected by "WhoisGuard (tm)". That service seems to protect site owners against spammers, at the cost of taking away the trust that visitors can have in a website.
- xorand 8y ago"I just got the same email (I assume) and all the links look about as suspicious as things come. I'd say to approach with caution at the very least" https://mathoverflow.net/questions/324400/thoughts-on-hessix https://mathoverflow.net/questions/324400/thoughts-on-hessix
- xamuel 8y agoGiven that his HN name, "whunting", is a reference to "Good Will Hunting", that suggests OP might be a non-mathematician math enthusiast. I can't think of a single mathematician who would unironically name themselves after Good Will Hunting. I don't mean that in a disparaging way, though. Mathematics could really stand to stop taking itself so seriously and have people kidding around more, and that goes for myself as well! But it kind of flies in the face of OP's refusal to grant accounts to people without academic affiliation (MIT janitors like the film's protagonist probably don't have math department email addresses). The site being such high quality production despite being written entirely in PHP suggests OP is quite an unusual person, I'd really like to learn more about him.
- phkahler 8y agoWhy are all the links to math.XX sites? Did someone buy all those up?
- whunting 8y agoThese are just categories (like subreddits)
- i-am-what-i-am 8y agoThat is the category. For example, math.GT is Graph Theory and math.NT is Number Theory.
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]
- stilley2 8y agoReminds me of https://paperkast.com https://paperkast.com
- mmmmpancakes 8y agoI don’t know how much discussion one hopes to generate by simply posting links to recent arxiv pre-prints. Posters don’t even seem to be giving a reason for posting them. It is very non-sequiter and unengaging. Honestly i would never use this. A better post format: Title: not the title of the paper (which will almost always sound super specific) but something more general abstract: a brief description at a high level of the discussion the poster hopes to generate, i.e. why. Probably they should all be text posts with some ability to add an external link. Also, posting some blogs would probably fare better for general discussion than just papers.
- whunting 8y agoSounds great. You can do that with a self post but it seems that arxiv url with auto fetched titled is the path of less resistance so far, not optimal for discussions, agreed. I'll probably change the submission format
- mmmmpancakes 8y agoOne thing that might be cool is to have extended discussions of some popular MO posts.
- whunting 8y agoWhat are the most popular MO posts you are thinking of? I might add a comment on those posts to let people know that they can continue the conversation on Hessix
- genidoi 8y agoI'm assuming that the value of these papers are self evident from the title if you understand the topic/context of the paper, much like HN with many of the white papers published here.
- throwawaymath 8y agoI actually follow a lot of the math-y papers that get posted here, but I'm still routinely perplexed when I see them on the front page. Many of the math papers posted here do seem like they lack a context, especially since they mostly receive a huge number of upvotes but have almost no discussion. I think it's a little weird on HN, and I can see why it seems like some of them are out of place even on a specialized math forum.
- tejassanap 8y agoDoes anyone know of a similar website for mechanical engineering?
- WhuzzupDomal 8y agoInteresting who have opened it. And does it have relation to HN.
- whunting 8y agoNo relation
- bmc7505 8y agoYou should check out ShortScience, which is (IMHO) a better format for academic discussions: https://www.shortscience.org/ https://www.shortscience.org/
- v64 8y agoI've found MathOverflow [1] to be the best high-level math discussion forum out there right now. Many prominent mathematicians are regular posters, and I think the question-and-answer format suits mathematical discussion very well. [1] https://mathoverflow.net/ https://mathoverflow.net/
- mlurp 8y agoMO is definitely high level, but like all SO/SE, I've always found their format to be really restricting. Not everything can be phrased as an objective question. Sometimes the best stuff have come out of something like "I was thinking about xyz, here are some things I noticed, thoughts?" I've even had/seen actual questions closed on SO/SE sites closed because of reasons I think are pretty silly. It's also just not meant for discussions; if there are more than a couple comment replies, they "move it to chat", which I've never used. Specific forums or subreddits can often have good discussion, but often not as much traffic.
- dan-robertson 8y agoMathoverflow doesn’t seem to suffer from so many issues as other SE sites. It doesn’t really get many low quality questions (those belong on math.SE instead), and far fewer people use the site so there is less aggressive moderation in general. It does still suffer a bit from questions being put on hold for annoying reasons but it does allow for big lists and refrence requests and such. It’s true that there’s lots of discussion that is out of the scope of mathoverflow which doesn’t have a centralised place to go on the internet. Such discussions tend to live on blogs and forums and email lists and discussions at conferences
- hkol3 8y agoThis is possibly why Jeff Atwood went off and made Discourse. If the StackExchange sites provide an allied discussion forum where I can specify what level of users I want posting on my thread that would be great. Where level can be verified grad/phd in subject X or anyone who has more than N accepted answers in subject X... Come on CS folk make it happen. Right now I have to wander around labs and conferences to find the right people and have these discussions. A gigantic waste of time when most of these folk hang out on MathOverflow but can't have these disccusions. Most of the progress in science came through 2-3 people finding and corresponding with each other. Here we are at a moment in time, where we don't need to find just 2-3 people. We can find ever single one whether they are sitting in Cambridge or Congo and lay out a subject before them and yet we haven't got that to work right.
- xamuel 8y agoNice idea, +1 for LaTeX titles! But the registration system should be way more open, you're discriminating against many math PhD's who are no longer in academia. I would have posted my paper there but I guess "@math.ohio-state.edu" isn't elite enough so I'll post it here and probably get more traction than all the papers on OP's entire site combined. https://arxiv.org/pdf/1201.2869.pdf https://arxiv.org/pdf/1201.2869.pdf "Infinite graphs in systematic biology, with an application to the species problem" (printed in Acta Biotheoretica). This paper is as fun as a barrel of monkeys. Its results are mind-blowing even though the math is approachable. By the time you finish the first section, you'll be thinking to yourself, "Charles Darwin should have been a computer scientist!"
- jtanderson 8y agoWow, yeah. Came here to say the same. I could understand somewhat making a distinction between emails that end in .edu and those who don't -- at least during the early days -- but this system does seem excessive. I do think the ideas in the paper are pretty cool! One question: have you considered or attempted some sort of generative models based on this system? You'd have to do some clever symbolic manipulations to deal with the "infinities" that crop up, but it seems like it could be interesting.
- xamuel 8y agoNot sure what you mean exactly by "generative models" but it reminds me of Rohde et al 2004 (https://www.nature.com/articles/nature02842 https://www.nature.com/articles/nature02842) which is all about modelling this sort of thing. In fact, some of the results of Rohde's paper are quantitative things which Rohde et al discovered by simulation and which my paper provides theoretical explanation for (see my paper's Proposition 6 and the last sentence of the abstract of Rohde et al).
- sampo 8y ago> emails that end in .edu Only universities in the United States have emails that end in .edu. Most of the universities in the world have domain names that end with their respective country code.
- no_math_phd 8y agoAs I see, that you require a math phd address. Why do you think that only PhD in math might contribute to the discussion? You are just making it impossible for people with non standard background to participate. You are reinforcing opinion widespread in academia that only people from the right background could do any meaningful research.
- omaranto 8y agoThe title of this submission says "math PhD", but if you try to register on the site you'll see it's actually looking for "math PhD candidates", so it's even weirder than you'd suggest: the site author wants discussion from people who don't have a PhD math but might get one in a couple of years. Very strange.
- whunting 8y agoI dont believe that. Its open for anyone to read, and for math PhDs to quickly register. All other addresses are put on hold for manual check, not rejected. Some people have requested to join in this thread and have received an account without a PhD. Its not meant to be elitist at all, just focused on the quality content (wherever it comes from)
- elihu 8y agoIn the "user guide" it says it's a platform for math/stats PhDs, and describes a process for checking email addresses. It certainly gives the impression of unwelcome to people who are neither PhDs nor currently enrolled in a PhD program. If you want people who don't have and aren't trying to obtain a PhD to participate, I think you should say so explicitly.
- thebooktocome 8y agoHow annoying. Not all math doctorates have university e-mails.
- _emacsomancer_ 8y agoI'm guessing it's also using Arc? (It's too bad that it is limited only to people in Maths PhD programs.)
- whunting 8y agoPHP, math or stats PhD. You can send an email to hsx at hessix dot com if you want an account
- tasseff 8y agoI cannot register with my University of Michigan email. It states, "You are not listed as a PhD candidate." What's the algorithm that determines if I'm a Ph.D. candidate?
- whunting 8y agoMatching a database of current PhD candidates among other things. This message just puts the registration on hold temporarily, and you will be able to register once manually verified
- bhnmmhmd 8y agoIs there a similar website for BUSINESS and MANAGEMENT?
- nimish 8y agoBoy do I have to have a) Ph.D. b) academic email? You'd be discriminating against everyone with a DPhil and not doing research in a university ;) I'm neither so I guess I shouldn't bother.
- kevinventullo 8y agoI'm confused, it's meant only for current math PhD candidates? Also, the front page has some numerical stuff about the goldbach conjecture from a chemist...
- angel_j 8y agohttps://www.hessix.com/?show=math.AP https://www.hessix.com/?show=math.AP https://www.hessix.com/?show=math.NT https://www.hessix.com/?show=math.NT https://www.hessix.com/?show=math.NA https://www.hessix.com/?show=math.NA https://www.hessix.com/?show=math.OC https://www.hessix.com/?show=math.OC etc..
- liamcardenas 8y agoI only use forums made by PhD computer scientists, sorry.