相关论文: What to do to have your paper rejected!

The road to becoming an astronomer is exciting, but often fraught with danger and conflicting messages. A PhD student is inundated with catch-phrases such as "publish or perish" and "it's not about the quantity, but the quality of work".…

A popular scientific contribution should not contradict any established facts and ought to be understandable. I complied with both these requirements and am offering a sufficiently full introduction to probability theory. Furthermore, I…

In response to growing concern about the reliability and reproducibility of published science, researchers have proposed adopting measures of greater statistical stringency, including suggestions to require larger sample sizes and to lower…

The chapter tackles the role of scholarly publication in the research process (quality, preservation) and looks at the consequences of new information technologies in the organization of the scholarly communication ecology. It will then…

Fast-growing scientific publications present challenges to the scientific community. In this paper, we describe their implications to researchers. As references form explicit foundations for researchers to conduct a study, we investigate…

Like it or not, attempts to evaluate and monitor the quality of academic research have become increasingly prevalent worldwide. Performance reviews range from at the level of individuals, through research groups and departments, to entire…

Despite enormous efforts devoted to understand the characteristics and impacts of retracted papers, little is known about the mechanisms underlying the dynamics of their harm and the dynamics of its propagation. Here, we propose a…

New researchers are usually very curious about the recipe that could accelerate the chances of their paper getting accepted in a reputed forum (journal/conference). In search of such a recipe, we investigate the profile and peer review text…

Scholarly journals rely on peer review to identify the science most worthy of publication. Yet finding willing and qualified reviewers to evaluate manuscripts has become an increasingly challenging task, possibly even threatening the…

We warn against a common but incomplete understanding of empirical research in machine learning that leads to non-replicable results, makes findings unreliable, and threatens to undermine progress in the field. To overcome this alarming…

"We risk sliding down toward the standards where the validity of action is decided by whether one can get away with it." (P. Doty) "We do not 'risk' sliding down toward such standards; we have reached them." (S. Lang) This is an essay in…

An effective structure helps an article to convey its core message. The optimal structure depends on the information to be conveyed and the expectations of the audience. In the current increasingly interdisciplinary era, structural norms…

The ongoing intense discussion on rising LLM usage in the scientific peer-review process has recently been mingled by reports of authors using hidden prompt injections to manipulate review scores. Since the existence of such "attacks" -…

A significant amount of research has considered mathematical proofs, the students who learn them, and the instructors that teach them, from a variety of perspectives. This paper considers this topic from four main perspectives: students'…

The advent of computers has allowed mathematicians to do increasingly more difficult computations that used to be practically impossible. Peer reviewers will seldom look at any code attached to a math paper, however. In this article, we…

Selecting the best scientific venue (i.e., conference/journal) for the submission of a research article constitutes a multifaceted challenge. Important aspects to consider are the suitability of research topics, a venue's prestige, and the…

In this work, I point out the negative implications for diversity in graduate school resulting from the use of cutoff scores on the GRE in the admissions process. In light of the data presented, as well as a swelling body of evidence…

Peer review is the primary means of quality control in academia; as an outcome of a peer review process, program and area chairs make acceptance decisions for each paper based on the review reports and scores they received. Quality of…

It is difficult to neutrally evaluate the risks posed by large-scale leading-edge science experiments. Traditional risk assessment is problematic in this context for multiple reasons. Also, such experiments can be insulated from challenge…

Undergraduate research experiences hold many potential benefits. Students can learn about new areas opening up previously unknown paths in academia and industry. The hands-on experience often provides a deeper understanding of what science,…