Related papers: Coauthorship and citation networks for statisticia…

We clarify a number of points raised in [Matias, arXiv:cond-mat/0507471v2 (2005)].

Comment on ``Boosting Algorithms: Regularization, Prediction and Model Fitting'' [arXiv:0804.2752]

Statements included in the comment published by Schumann et al. (arXiv:1904.03023v1) are contradicted by documents that were communicated to one of the co-authors of the comment (Dr. Koester). These documents are reviewed but cannot be…

We comment on the paper "Teleportation with a uniformly accelerated partner" (quant-ph/0302179).

Rejoinder to "Quantifying the Fraction of Missing Information for Hypothesis Testing in Statistical and Genetic Studies" [arXiv:1102.2774]

Comment on "Harold Jeffreys's Theory of Probability Revisited" [arXiv:0804.3173]

Comment on "Harold Jeffreys's Theory of Probability Revisited" [arXiv:0804.3173]

Comment on "Harold Jeffreys's Theory of Probability Revisited" [arXiv:0804.3173]

Comment on "Harold Jeffreys's Theory of Probability Revisited" [arXiv:0804.3173]

Comment on ``Understanding OR, PS and DR'' [arXiv:0804.2958]

This is a response to the paper "Some statistical aspects of the Covid-19 response" by Wood et al, submitted to the discussion at the read paper meeting of the Royal Statistical Society on 10th April 2025.

The content of this paper is now available as part of arXiv:0902.1502

Rejoinder to "Feature Matching in Time Series Modeling" by Y. Xia and H. Tong [arXiv:1104.3073]

It has been shown (S. Lawrence, 2001, Nature, 411, 521) that journal articles which have been posted without charge on the internet are more heavily cited than those which have not been. Using data from the NASA Astrophysics Data System…

I comment on the paper hep-th/9808013 by A. Berkovich and B.M. McCoy.

This is a Comment to the recent 3 papers by S.S. Afonin

I provide some comments on Arithmetic Teichmuller Spaces constructed in my paper arXiv:2106.11452.

The reply by Oughstun et al. [J. Opt. Soc. Am. B 28, 468-469 (2011)] to our comment [J. Opt. Soc. Am. B 28, 450-452 (2011)] on their recently published paper [J. Opt. Soc. Am. B 27, 1664-1670 (2010)] is shown to make no response to the main…

This paper has been withdrawn by arXiv administrators because of disputed claims of authorship among former collaborators

This is a Comment to the recent review by L. Glozman, hep-ph/0701081