Thursday, 16 September 2010
most recent working paper.
Monday, 13 September 2010
recent paper Frank and Sarkar apply game theory to enhance conservation efforts. Their examples include the wild dogs in South Africa, red grouse and raptors in Britain and the conservation of coral reefs near the Philippenes. I find the application thrilling, though the game theory is not completely correct.
Saturday, 11 September 2010
The IF of a journal for a given year is calculated as the number of citations to the papers published in the preceding two years, divided by the number of papers published in those years. This measure was originally introduced by Garfield to highlight journals that are hot. The index has been calculated annually ever since and for an ever increasing set of journals. As this indicator is readily available (for a non-negligible fee!), people started to use it as a quality indicator. A journal with a higher IF was (and is) considered better. A paper in a journal with a higher IF was considered better. A researcher with papers in journals with higher IFs was considered better. A department with researchers with papers in journals with higher IFs was considered better.
In a sense everyone was right. Ceteris paribus, a journal with a higher IF has a greater impact (whatever that means) and is therefore better in some sense. Unfortunately the IF is not only about quality, but many other things.
Thursday, 9 September 2010
I regularly review papers for Mathematical Reviews. The task does not always come at the right time, but otherwise it is very rewarding: the papers I get are usually very interesting, and are often published in journals I do not normally read (the one below is an exception).