by jordicabot | Jun 13, 2014 | publishing, Research Rants
A typical question in every workshop I co-organize is whether we (the organizers) are allowed to submit papers to the workshop. I almost never do it but I have no problem with other co-organizers doing it (I’m assuming we are talking about real workshops, not...
by jordicabot | Mar 5, 2014 | evaluating research, publishing, Research Rants
I took the time to count how many new reviews for the ECMFA’14 conference were uploaded each day to the easychair account for the conference. The results, displayed below, are exactly what I was expecting (it’s also my own behaviour đŸ™‚ ). Even if the...
by jordicabot | Dec 5, 2013 | evaluating research, publishing, Research Rants
Empirical validation is becoming a MUST if you want a publish a research paper on software engineering topics. In principle, this is a good thing, right? I mean, for sure, in a field like ours validating the usefulness/applicability/.. of our new...
by jordicabot | Aug 14, 2013 | doing research, presenting, publishing, Research Rants
As a researcher you want to reach as many people as possible. For sure, open access would help by making sure everybody that wants to read of your papers can, but before anybody tries to read one of your papers s/he has to find it first. This is not a problem for your...
by jordicabot | Jul 5, 2013 | publishing, Research Rants
I have my own personal list of fake conferences (or cleary “for profit” conferences, i.e. conferences where the organizers have as primary goal to make money regardless of the scientific aspect). I do my best to educate my team about how to identify these...
by jordicabot | Jun 14, 2013 | doing research, publishing, Research Rants
These last days I’ve been following the twitter campaign #negativeresults to promote the publication of negative results. In the end, negative results are also results and could save the time of many other fellow researchers wasting their lives doing experiments...
Latests SW Eng posts