Brand new way of working out quality of papers

In summary, the conversation discusses a website that rates and judges the validity of scientific claims and theories, known as the "crackpot index." While some agree that such a scale is needed in mathematics, others criticize the index for allowing certain behaviors and criteria, while punishing others. The conversation also mentions using this index to rate a specific individual's posts.
  • #1
Zurtex
Science Advisor
Homework Helper
1,120
1
Someone here has worked out a way that applies to physics:

http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/crackpot.html

Anyone wishing to try and apply it to maths? I think it will be an easy transition :smile:
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
  • #2
I agree that such a scale is needed in math, but I'm not a fan of this crackpot index. Somehow citing incorrect premises and making vaccuous statements is acceptable (wih the -5 point starting 'credit', there's flexibility for 1- and 2-point mistakes), but the other behaviors aren't. I can think of many noncrackpots who would get negative scores... Erdos frequently offered prize money for proofs and counterexamples, many mention (for various reasons) their schooling, a brief mention of the duration of one's study of the material is not beyond the pale of belief, and so on.

Combined with the fact that Baez's own index rates itself as more of a crackpot than a paper with a dozen logical inconsistencies and half a dozen otherwise false statements... :tongue2:
 
  • #3
lol

That's a great site. We must use it for judging eljose's next topic.
 
  • #4
DeadWolfe said:
lol

That's a great site. We must use it for judging eljose's next topic.

So the next time he has a post, we should all just post ratings without mentioning the source or reason?
 
  • #5
No, mention the source and the reason.
 
  • #6
It's not new. I used it to grade one of the doren shadmi "papers". I stopped when he scored 120 points.
 

1. What is a brand new way of working out quality of papers?

A brand new way of working out quality of papers refers to a recently developed method or approach for evaluating the excellence or validity of academic papers. It may involve new techniques, tools, or criteria that differ from traditional methods of assessing paper quality.

2. How is this new method different from traditional ways of evaluating paper quality?

This new method may differ from traditional ways of evaluating paper quality in several ways. It may use different metrics or measures to determine the quality of a paper, take into account different factors or aspects of a paper, or involve a more rigorous and objective evaluation process.

3. What are the potential benefits of using this new method?

The potential benefits of using this new method include more accurate and unbiased assessments of paper quality, better identification of high-quality research, and improved credibility and rigor in academic publishing. It may also encourage researchers to focus on producing high-quality papers and facilitate the dissemination of valuable research findings.

4. Are there any limitations or drawbacks to this new method?

Like any new approach, this new method may have some limitations or drawbacks. It may require additional resources or expertise to implement, and there may be a learning curve for those unfamiliar with the method. It may also be subject to criticism or skepticism from those accustomed to traditional ways of evaluating paper quality.

5. Is this new method widely accepted and adopted in the scientific community?

It depends on the specific method in question. Some new methods may have gained widespread acceptance and adoption among researchers and publishers, while others may still be in the early stages of development and testing. It is essential to critically evaluate any new method and consider its effectiveness and potential impact before adopting it in a particular scientific field.

Similar threads

Replies
3
Views
56
  • General Math
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
4
Views
361
Replies
4
Views
666
  • STEM Career Guidance
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
7
Views
982
  • Science and Math Textbooks
Replies
28
Views
2K
Replies
12
Views
1K
Back
Top