Became Hot Network Question

occurred Feb 28, 2019 at 16:04

deleted 12 characters in body; edited tags

Source Link

edited Feb 28, 2019 at 9:07

65k
18
199
306

I am quite surprised to find that a lecture slide for a course has 133 citations from highly reputable researchers across the world. The main contribution of the lecture slides (which seems to be the reason for the citations) appears in 1 line on 1 page of the slide out of 30 slides. (Citation count according to Google Scholar)

Another set of random course notes from lecture 12 of a course just happens to have over 100 citations, Reinforcement Learning and Control - CS229
This 8 page course note has 200 citations, which is more than many of actual research papers
Also, another summary of a blog post (less than 14 pages) has over 700 citations (From the paper: This paper originally appeared as a blog post on 19 January 2016.)

Citation count from Google Scholar. This paper isn't even published anywhere aside from Arxiv.

What is the point of even publishing a paper and going through the painstaking process of peer review and editing if you can just write some blog post or a power point lecture slide on some hot topic and accumulate citation counts (which is crucial for securing funding, etc.)?

I am quite surprised to find that a lecture slide for a course has 133 citations from highly reputable researchers across the world. The main contribution of the lecture slides (which seems to be the reason for the citations) appears in 1 line on 1 page of the slide out of 30 slides. (Citation count according to Google Scholar)

Another set of random course notes from lecture 12 of a course just happens to have over 100 citations, Reinforcement Learning and Control - CS229
This 8 page course note has 200 citations, which is more than many of actual research papers
Also, another summary of a blog post (less than 14 pages) has over 700 citations (From the paper: This paper originally appeared as a blog post on 19 January 2016.)

Citation count from Google Scholar. This paper isn't even published anywhere aside from Arxiv.

What is the point of even publishing a paper and going through the painstaking process of peer review and editing if you can just write some blog post or a power point lecture slide on some hot topic and accumulate citation counts (which is crucial for securing funding, etc.)?

I am quite surprised to find that a lecture slide for a course has 133 citations from highly reputable researchers across the world. The main contribution of the lecture slides (which seems to be the reason for the citations) appears in 1 line on 1 page of the slide out of 30 slides. (Citation count according to Google Scholar)

Another set of random course notes from lecture 12 of a course just happens to have over 100 citations, Reinforcement Learning and Control - CS229
This 8 page course note has 200 citations, which is more than many of actual research papers
Also, another summary of a blog post (less than 14 pages) has over 700 citations (From the paper: This paper originally appeared as a blog post on 19 January 2016.)

Citation count from Google Scholar. This paper isn't even published anywhere aside from Arxiv.

What is the point of even publishing a paper and going through the painstaking process of peer review and editing if you can just write some blog post or a lecture slide on some hot topic and accumulate citation counts (which is crucial for securing funding, etc.)?

that was nowhere near the top result for me, so linked to the search result directly

Source Link

edit approved Feb 27, 2019 at 13:30

Community Bot

1

I am quite surprised to find that a lecture slide for a course has 133 citations from highly reputable researchers across the world. The main contribution of the lecture slides (which seems to be the reason for the citations) appears in 1 line on 1 page of the slide out of 30 slides. To see citation count, google: "RMSProp"(Citation count according to Google Scholar)

Another set of random course notes from lecture 12 of a course just happens to have over 100 citations, google: Reinforcement Learning and Control - CS229Reinforcement Learning and Control - CS229
This 8 page course note has 200 citations, which is more than many of actual research papers
Also, another summary of a blog post (less than 14 pages) havehas over 700 citations (From the paper: This paper originally appeared as a blog post on 19 January 2016.)

To see citation count, google: "An overview of gradient descent optimization algorithms"Citation count from Google Scholar. This paper isn't even published anywhere aside from Arxiv.

What is the point of even publishing a paper and going through the painstaking process of peer review and editing if you can just write some blog post or a power point lecture slide on some hot topic and accumulate citation counts (which is crucial for securing funding, etc.)?

I am quite surprised to find that a lecture slide for a course has 133 citations from highly reputable researchers across the world. The main contribution of the lecture slides (which seems to be the reason for the citations) appears in 1 line on 1 page of the slide out of 30 slides. To see citation count, google: "RMSProp"

Another set of random course notes from lecture 12 of a course just happens to have over 100 citations, google: Reinforcement Learning and Control - CS229
This 8 page course note has 200 citations, which is more than many of actual research papers
Also, another summary of a blog post (less than 14 pages) have over 700 citations (From the paper: This paper originally appeared as a blog post on 19 January 2016.)

To see citation count, google: "An overview of gradient descent optimization algorithms". This paper isn't even published anywhere aside from Arxiv.

What is the point of even publishing a paper and going through the painstaking process of peer review and editing if you can just write some blog post or a power point lecture slide on some hot topic and accumulate citation counts (which is crucial for securing funding, etc.)?

I am quite surprised to find that a lecture slide for a course has 133 citations from highly reputable researchers across the world. The main contribution of the lecture slides (which seems to be the reason for the citations) appears in 1 line on 1 page of the slide out of 30 slides. (Citation count according to Google Scholar)

Another set of random course notes from lecture 12 of a course just happens to have over 100 citations, Reinforcement Learning and Control - CS229
This 8 page course note has 200 citations, which is more than many of actual research papers
Also, another summary of a blog post (less than 14 pages) has over 700 citations (From the paper: This paper originally appeared as a blog post on 19 January 2016.)

Citation count from Google Scholar. This paper isn't even published anywhere aside from Arxiv.

What is the point of even publishing a paper and going through the painstaking process of peer review and editing if you can just write some blog post or a power point lecture slide on some hot topic and accumulate citation counts (which is crucial for securing funding, etc.)?

Tweeted twitter.com/StackAcademia/status/1100727406808190977

occurred Feb 27, 2019 at 12:00

Hide links and use a bullet list for the examples, also (slight?

Source Link

edited Feb 27, 2019 at 10:46

user2768

41.1k
9
95
144

Why publishingpublish a research paper when a blog post or a lecture slide can have more citation count than a journal paper?

I am quite surprised to find that a lecture slide for a course has 133 citations from highly reputable researchers across the world. The main contribution of the lecture slides (which seems to be the reason for the citations) appears in 1 line on 1 page of the slide out of 30 slides. To see citation count, google: "RMSProp"

Another set of random course notes from lecture 12 of a course just happens to have over 100 citations, google: Reinforcement Learning and Control - CS229
This 8 page course note has 200 citations, which is more than many of actual research papers
Also, another summary of a blog post (less than 14 pages) have over 700 citations (From the paper: This paper originally appeared as a blog post on 19 January 2016.)

To see citation count, google: "An overview of gradient descent optimization algorithms". This paper isn't even published anywhere aside from Arxiv.

What is the point of even publishing a paper and going through the painstaking process of peer review and editing if you can just write some blog post or a power point lecture slide on some hot topic and accumulate citation counts (which is crucial for securing funding, etc.)?

Why publishing a research paper when a blog post or a lecture slide can have more citation count than a journal paper?

I am quite surprised to find that a lecture slide for a course has 133 citations from highly reputable researchers across the world. The main contribution of the lecture slides (which seems to be the reason for the citations) appears in 1 line on 1 page of the slide out of 30 slides. To see citation count, google: "RMSProp"

Another set of random course notes from lecture 12 of a course just happens to have over 100 citations, google: Reinforcement Learning and Control - CS229
This 8 page course note has 200 citations, which is more than many of actual research papers
Also, another summary of a blog post (less than 14 pages) have over 700 citations (From the paper: This paper originally appeared as a blog post on 19 January 2016.)

To see citation count, google: "An overview of gradient descent optimization algorithms". This paper isn't even published anywhere aside from Arxiv.

What is the point of even publishing a paper and going through the painstaking process of peer review and editing if you can just write some blog post or a power point lecture slide on some hot topic and accumulate citation counts (which is crucial for securing funding, etc.)?

Why publish a research paper when a blog post or a lecture slide can have more citation count than a journal paper?

I am quite surprised to find that a lecture slide for a course has 133 citations from highly reputable researchers across the world. The main contribution of the lecture slides (which seems to be the reason for the citations) appears in 1 line on 1 page of the slide out of 30 slides. To see citation count, google: "RMSProp"

Another set of random course notes from lecture 12 of a course just happens to have over 100 citations, google: Reinforcement Learning and Control - CS229
This 8 page course note has 200 citations, which is more than many of actual research papers
Also, another summary of a blog post (less than 14 pages) have over 700 citations (From the paper: This paper originally appeared as a blog post on 19 January 2016.)

To see citation count, google: "An overview of gradient descent optimization algorithms". This paper isn't even published anywhere aside from Arxiv.

What is the point of even publishing a paper and going through the painstaking process of peer review and editing if you can just write some blog post or a power point lecture slide on some hot topic and accumulate citation counts (which is crucial for securing funding, etc.)?