Timeline for Is it a good idea to write a paper on new algorithms based on an existing algorithm?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
26 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nov 2, 2022 at 14:21 | comment | added | Matt | If you wanted (say) code for doing so, definitely. If you wanted advice about whether doing so required permission, coauthorship, a citation, or nothing at all, I'd leave that open too. | |
| Nov 2, 2022 at 14:16 | comment | added | Azor Ahai -him- | @Matt I'm not sure what the relevance of your first sentence is. Nevertheless, if I asked a question about how to adapt stimuli (say), it would get slapped closed immediately. I don't see how this is different. | |
| Nov 2, 2022 at 13:39 | comment | added | Matt | @AzorAhai-him-, Sure but the general process of choosing a department, advisor, or project is also on-topic here. What we're not meant to do is offer suggestions on specific choices: OP should try to extend Foo et al. (2019) using Bar (2022)'s trick, not Baz and Quux (2021)'s idea. Obviously, vote your conscience, but that's how I see it. | |
| Nov 2, 2022 at 13:33 | answer | added | Matt | timeline score: 2 | |
| Nov 1, 2022 at 16:13 | comment | added | Azor Ahai -him- | @Matt The project isn't done, making it not a question on how to "write up the results." It is asking for feedback on what research project to do next. | |
| Nov 1, 2022 at 16:08 | comment | added | Matt | @AzorAhai-him- I'd distinguish between questions about the specific content of research ("How do I prove this alg runs in polynomial time?"), which should be asked elsewhere, and questions about if, when, how, and with whom one writes up the results of research generally, which are squarely on-topic here. In my view, this is the latter. | |
| Nov 1, 2022 at 15:11 | comment | added | Azor Ahai -him- | @Matt "However, because the algorithm is very general, there are many possibilities to develop new algorithms based on that algorithm and to improve the efficiency of the algorithm. Is it a good idea to write a paper on new algorithms based on that algorithm?" This is a question about doing research. | |
| Oct 31, 2022 at 18:13 | comment | added | Matt | I don't know that it's particularly field-specific. Most work builds on previous work, in ways that might not be obvious to an undergrad. | |
| Oct 31, 2022 at 14:44 | comment | added | Agnishom Chattopadhyay | It is possible that this is a novel application of the general algorithm. Ultimately, you can submit it to a conference/journal anyway, and let the reviewers determine if this paper was worth writing | |
| Oct 31, 2022 at 14:08 | comment | added | Azor Ahai -him- | Yes, maybe "field-specific" was a little imprecise, but that is what I meant. | |
| Oct 31, 2022 at 14:07 | comment | added | Azor Ahai -him- | @Kimball "This question is about the content of research." It's under the "community-specific reasons" close reasons. | |
| Oct 31, 2022 at 13:58 | comment | added | Kimball | @AzorAhai-him- Sorry, what? There are lots of field-specific questions on here, as many things vary by field. I've never heard that this is a reason to close a question. (Also, it's not that specific.) | |
| Oct 31, 2022 at 13:56 | comment | added | leftaroundabout | Only a small fraction of published algorithms are groundbreaking. That doesn't mean the other ones don't deserve attention too. | |
| Oct 31, 2022 at 4:21 | history | became hot network question | |||
| Oct 31, 2022 at 2:46 | review | Close votes | |||
| Nov 8, 2022 at 3:07 | |||||
| Oct 31, 2022 at 2:28 | comment | added | Azor Ahai -him- | This is a field-specific question and should be closed, but I suspect it won't be because of who usually visits Academia.SE (i.e. a lot of mathematicians and computer scientists). | |
| Oct 31, 2022 at 0:11 | vote | accept | teruima | ||
| S Oct 31, 2022 at 0:06 | history | suggested | Neuchâtel |
add topic to the post
|
|
| Oct 31, 2022 at 0:06 | review | Suggested edits | |||
| S Oct 31, 2022 at 0:06 | |||||
| Oct 31, 2022 at 0:00 | history | tweeted | twitter.com/StackAcademia/status/1586870592677912576 | ||
| Oct 30, 2022 at 21:41 | answer | added | Ben | timeline score: 11 | |
| Oct 30, 2022 at 20:42 | review | Close votes | |||
| Oct 30, 2022 at 20:55 | |||||
| Oct 30, 2022 at 20:41 | answer | added | Buffy | timeline score: 15 | |
| Oct 30, 2022 at 20:33 | history | edited | teruima | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 88 characters in body
|
| Oct 30, 2022 at 20:27 | comment | added | Alexander Woo | It depends a lot on where you are and what your career demands. As a tenured associate professor I find that writing not very interesting papers not really worth my time, but a graduate student or an untenured professor (particularly in a less research-intensive position) may find this is the best paper they are capable of writing at the time and having a paper, even a less interesting one, might be important to their career. | |
| Oct 30, 2022 at 20:16 | history | asked | teruima | CC BY-SA 4.0 |