freenode/#sicl - IRC Chatlog
Search
17:31:05
beach
There should be more of this kind of exchange in our field, and probably in others as well.
17:32:09
beach
On the other hand, authors should also not take criticism as an accusation of inferior work. They should welcome improvements on their work. I certainly would.
17:37:04
alandipert
was the referee somehow disincentivized to promote criticism, like maybe the work was the basis for a grant or something? when i hear these stories i feel sad, and wonder about the underlying economics at play
17:38:42
alandipert
fortunately in my case i'm combining known techniques in a novel way towards a new set of goals. so my question about how to critique is about where in the paper to critique. case-by-case in my previous work section, or when i rationalize decisions i made as part of the description of my techniques
17:39:04
alandipert
now that i think about it, perhaps i should do both and then revisit if i come out > 8 pages :-)
17:40:49
beach
That's hard to answer i general. I often have a section entitled "Benefits of our technique".
17:41:31
beach
In it, I can compare it to the "previous work" section, and it doesn't have to be case by case for a particular previous work.
17:43:12
alandipert
i think that might make the most sense in my case. especially since i only care to critique previous work as it directly relates to what i'm doing
17:44:00
beach
Dinner is imminent here. And then I will spend time with my (admittedly small) family. So i a few minutes, I'll be off.
17:44:04
alandipert
i started off by being as charitable as possible but i think the paper as a whole might suffer. since it's not a survey