4 ms·
What am I missing here? Numerical quadrature has been around for a long time; is there something I'm overlooking that makes this different?
by jejones3141 13y ago
What am I missing here? Numerical quadrature has been around for a long time; is there something I'm overlooking that makes this different?
- m_ke 13y agoYeah that it has 209 citations and is now named after the author. Also http://m.care.diabetesjournals.org/content/17/10/1225.2.full.pdf?sid=fe4a0e96-d4f7-442f-8cb3-c04980fd1470 http://m.care.diabetesjournals.org/content/17/10/1225.2.full...
- jamessb 13y agoThat is the point: the paper presents this as if it were an original idea, and other people cite it. There have been various blog posts ridiculing it, and for a while there was wikipedia article (subsequently replaced by a redirect to 'trapezoidal rule') [2]. [1] http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/discoblog/2010/12/07/ncbi-rofl-clueless-doctor-sleeps-through-math-class-reinvents-calculus-and-names-it-after-herself http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/discoblog/2010/12/07/ncbi-... [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Tai%27s_method&diff=463611430&oldid=463023947 https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Tai%27s_method&di...