Random Publication

PostalWookie · Apr 20, 2005

One of my profs asked me if I was interested in helping him write a review of work he has done on the origins of life, since I know him and his work really well. I might do it just for kicks, but I was wondering if that's the kind of thing that one even puts on a CV ( I definitely don't plan on doing any work in that field ever)

beary · Apr 20, 2005

My impression is that people usually put all their publications, including reviews, on their CVs. A review isn't "worth" as much, but it is still a publication.

mjs · Apr 20, 2005

If you want to do it, do it and include it on a CV.

javert · Apr 20, 2005

When I saw the title of this thread, the first thing I thought of was the random, computer-generated paper that was recently accepted at a CompSci conference. :laugh:

Anyway, if you're interested in the area, then I'd say go for it.

microTAS · Apr 20, 2005

Hey weren't you going to sit around on your ass this summer anyways? 😛

Kidding... it's a lot of reading/writing even w/ background in the area, but a nearly foolproof way to add another line to your CV. I'd definitely sign up if it's for a journal (not book chapter), but maybe at somewhere tropical?? 😀

Nuel · Apr 20, 2005

javert said:
When I saw the title of this thread, the first thing I thought of was the random, computer-generated paper that was recently accepted at a CompSci conference.

Anyway, if you're interested in the area, then I'd say go for it.

I have actually co-authored a CS paper (well, I did all the work and wrote the paper, but was thrown to last author 😕 ) for the Proceedings of an Informatics and Systemics conference.

This crap is total **** :laugh:

So, after typing my name and reading a few of the papers, it appears the program just pieces up sentences, and hence the the lack of literary coherence in the fully generated papers. For example, check out this meaningless banter on "A Case for Von Neumann Machines"

3 Implementation

Cocking is elegant; so, too, must be our implementation. Cocking is composed of a hand-optimized compiler, a collection of shell scripts, and a centralized logging facility. We have not yet implemented the homegrown database, as this is the least appropriate component of our methodology [1,11,7]. Our system requires root access in order to improve knowledge-based theory.

Nuel · Apr 20, 2005

WMSCI, as seen in SCIgen, is actually a low-key conference thingy. The reviewers there are quite nonchalant, taking crap and non-crap. Kinda makes me wonder sometimes!

N-Surge · Apr 26, 2005

PostalWookie said:
One of my profs asked me if I was interested in helping him write a review of work he has done on the origins of life, since I know him and his work really well. I might do it just for kicks, but I was wondering if that's the kind of thing that one even puts on a CV ( I definitely don't plan on doing any work in that field ever)

Do it. If anything, it will be a very educational experience. Whatever field you do end up in, you will have an idea of what it takes to write a review. This is a good thing. 🙂

PostalWookie · Apr 26, 2005

microTAS said:
but maybe at somewhere tropical?? 😀

I like that suggestion :laugh:

Random Publication

PostalWookie

Senior Member

beary

Pancytopenic

mjs

Millionaire, Superhero

javert

Mostly Harmless

microTAS

ulna you didn't

Nuel

Full Member

Nuel

Full Member

N-Surge

Emeritus

PostalWookie

Senior Member

Similar threads