[Esip-preserve] Yeah! Another Citation on Papers with Nonsense
brbarkstrom at gmail.com
Sat Mar 1 12:31:49 EST 2014
See the new Scientific American article on Stolen Words.
That uses a software tool for analyzing longer text strings
and comparing one string with another. That may be appropriate
for disciplines with textual jargon. On the other hand, it may
not help much in dealing with heavily mathematical material,
such as derivations of the equations in climate or weather forecasting
On Sat, Mar 1, 2014 at 2:03 AM, David Arctur [OGC] <
darctur at opengeospatial.org> wrote:
> It would be interesting if this approach for generating nonsense
> scientific articles could mutate from being a problem to enabling community
> policing of scientific journals...
> -------- Original Message -------- Subject: Re: [Esip-preserve] Yeah!
> Another Citation on Papers with Nonsense Date: Fri, 28 Feb 2014 15:02:11
> -0700 From: Kamel Didan <didan at email.arizona.edu><didan at email.arizona.edu> To:
> Bruce Barkstrom <brbarkstrom at gmail.com> <brbarkstrom at gmail.com> CC:
> esip-preserve at lists.esipfed.org <esip-preserve at lists.esipfed.org><esip-preserve at lists.esipfed.org>
> Thanks for sharing-
> That is terrible and funny-
> The question remains who's fault it is? The reviewers? Journal? fake
> authors? or the whole science community (it said they were highly cited)?
> On Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 2:47 PM, Bruce Barkstrom <brbarkstrom at gmail.com>wrote:
>> Bruce B.
>> Esip-preserve mailing list
>> Esip-preserve at lists.esipfed.org
> Esip-preserve mailing list
> Esip-preserve at lists.esipfed.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Esip-preserve