3 ms·
I was going to make this point, as I do agree. However in a fast paced field such as this, timing is crucial. And all of these papers so far are technically pr
by was_a_dev 3y ago
I was going to make this point, as I do agree.
However in a fast paced field such as this, timing is crucial. And all of these papers so far are technically pre-prints on the arxiv.
- reactordev 3y agoWhich is kind of the point I was inferring. Everything now is just a stake in the ground, house pending… I think for a paper about an algorithm or novel way of doing something should be required to include the source code (not necessarily for release, but for proof to the journal reviewer at least). I’ve waited countless times for source code promised in a paper to never arrive, only to be flipped into some commercial offering only the ultra wealthy can afford. So I’m taking the stance of “I don’t believe you unless there’s a runtime or source code” because it’s too easy with AI to fake the claim.
- was_a_dev 3y agoIt does make me wonder how a reviewer can truly review a CS paper without running the code.