Related papers: Comment on "Quantifying Long-term Scientific Impac…
Deep learning has had a great impact on various fields of computer science by enabling data-driven representation learning in a decade. Because science and technology policy decisions for a nation can be made on the impact of each…
The Comment by Duval et al. [PRL 96, 099701 (2006)] addresses an important, but not the main, result of our Letter [PRL 95, 137204 (2005)]. It does not contradict our results in substance, and the only objection is really on the style of…
Citations in science are being studied from several perspectives, among which approaches such as scientometrics and science of science. In this chapter I briefly review some of the literature on citations, citation distributions and models…
This is a comment on E. D. Greaves et al. paper. We argue that their laboratory experiment cannot be interpreted as measuring the one-way speed of light.
The article is taken out.
The title paper is discussed critically. There are major problems with incorrect statements, irrelevant citations, incorrect mathematics leading to incorrect results, which are compared with our own simulations.
Institutions and their aggregates are not the right units of analysis for developing a science policy with cognitive goals in view. Institutions, however, can be compared in terms of their performance with reference to their previous…
This posting addresses the incorrect information (about my papers) and analysis provided in the following articles: arXiv:1405.4000/Nanotechnology 26, 245202 (2015), arXiv:1412.7765/Scientific Reports 4, 7553 (2014), Appl. Phys. Lett. 105,…
This work by Feng and papers which published its conclusions do not cite nor do they deal with objections by the author published in 2013-2014. There are many fundamental problems. We will summarize here the principal problems, as published…
Understanding the impact of scientific publications is crucial for identifying breakthroughs and guiding future research. Traditional metrics based on citation counts often miss the nuanced ways a paper contributes to its field. In this…
This is an erratum to our paper.
Discussion of ``EQUI-energy sampler'' by Kou, Zhou and Wong [math.ST/0507080]
Discussion of ``EQUI-energy sampler'' by Kou, Zhou and Wong [math.ST/0507080]
We address the three points raised by the authors of the above Comment.
We are submitting a comment on the paper "Quantum Opacity, the RHIC HBT Puzzle, and the Chiral Phase Transition" by J.G. Cramer, G.A. Miller, J.M.S. Wu and J. Yoon, published in Phys. Rev. Lett. 94, 102302 (2005).
Nauenberg's extended critique of Quantum Enigma rests on fundamental misunderstandings.
This is the authors response to commentaries on the original article H is for Human and How (Not) to Evaluate Qualitative Research in HCI, https://doi.org/10.1080/07370024.2025.2475743 Commentaries were provided by: Jeffrey Bardzell,…
It is shown that the analysis and the main result of the article by L-A. Wu [Phys. Rev. A 53, 2053 (1996)] are completely erroneous.
We reply to the criticisms of our publication (N. Hasegawa, K. Hagino, and Y. Tanimura, Phys. Lett. B808, 135693 (2020)) made by A. Ono in his recent article, arXiv:2201.02966.
There is a gap in Theorem 2.2 of the paper of Du (\cite{D_2010}). In this paper, we shall state the gap and repair it.