by jordicabot | Mar 21, 2017 | evaluating research, publishing, Research Rants
I have the feeling that more and more people cite workshop papers to sustain their claims. As if workshop papers were peer-reviewed. They are not. At most, they are “peer-filtered” (meaning that the PC of the workshop checked the work to make sure authors...
by jordicabot | Aug 26, 2015 | evaluating research, Research Rants
First of all , the “I” in the post title is not me, it’s Richard Paige, Professor of Enterprise Systems and (as of May 2015) Deputy Head of Department (Research) in the Department of Computer Science at the University of York. And besides all this,...
by jordicabot | Aug 6, 2015 | evaluating research, Research Rants
Read about the new features of metaScience, an online service we released a couple of months ago to give some insights on conferences (see the original announcement here). We have now released the new version of our service, which features new metrics for conferences...
by jordicabot | Jul 6, 2015 | evaluating research, funny, Research Rants
Maybe it’s because the hypercriticality of our research area but if I had to summarize what I think it’s my main role as PC Chair, I´d say is the following: (if you don’t recognize the song the meme is paraphrasing, you’re too young to be doing...
by jordicabot | Apr 18, 2015 | evaluating research, Research Rants, tools
Announcing the release of our new MetaScience online service that we have developed to help on the critical matter of evaluating the quality of conferences using metrics that are not usually available (unless you take the time to calculate them yourself). The current...
by jordicabot | Jan 12, 2015 | evaluating research, funny, Research Rants
Very funny (and sad at the same time) collection of reviewer’s comments on research papers on http://shitmyreviewerssay.tumblr.com/ (also on twitter at yourpapersucks). The comments mix criticisms on what probably are really bad papers The best thing about the...
