Amen to all that.  But you underestimate the *huge* bias:

A coauthor and myself have gotten push-back even on our
not using an academic or corporate email address;
that may have been an editor's issue -- they just may
have been trying not to have to deal with the push-back
they would be getting on that basis.  We did not change
our contact emails -- our form of push-back.

Another case from a few weeks ago: A friend couldn't post
on the arXiv because he was no longer current -- translation:
"You haven't posted/published enough lately for our 'standards' --
correctness and validity are secondary issues nowadays.
I expect the situation will only get worse.

Chhers, Gene

On 12/21/2012 9:31 AM, Ben Goertzel wrote:

Aaron,

Anyone can write a paper and submit it to a scientific journal or conference.  
There
is surely some bias toward submissions from folks with university or corporate
research lab affiliation, but it's not a *huge* bias....  (And there are other 
biases
too, like the one in most Western journals in favor of Westerners and against
Chinese....)    The main issue for independent scientists without an academic
background, is knowing how to write a paper with the right format and style and 
the
right sort of contents...

To publish a paper on your new/ improved algorithm, the easiest route is to 
show that
it outperforms the best current algorithms on some recognized test problems.   
If
that's not appropriate for your case, then alternatives include

-- show results of systematic testing of your algorithm on some datasets, 
exploring
where it works best and trying to explain why, and comparing its performance to 
other
approaches

-- prove some theorems about the algorithm....  This looks like "meat" and then 
less
burden is placed on your experimental results

Some journals are easier to get accepted in than others.  Generally the ones 
with
higher impact factor (you can find journals sorted by impact factor various 
places
online) are harder to get papers accepted in.     Some conferences are easier 
to get
accepted in than others too; I think there are also online ratings of the 
impact of
conference proceedings...   But conference publication has the aspect that you 
need
to go to the conference, and pay to register, travel, etc.; so it's not really
worthwhile unless the conference actually interests you ... (of course for 
academics,
their university pays all that...)

Be aware that most referee reports for journal/conference papers are harsh and
haughty in tone.  Don't take it personally, that's just the personality aspect 
that
refereeing seems to bring out in most academics.  Just try to incorporate 
whatever
constructive criticism is in the referee reports, then revise and resubmit 
elsewhere...

If you would like comments on a draft paper on one of your algorithms, feel 
free to
send it to me sometime and I'll give you some feedback....

thx
ben g



On Thu, Dec 20, 2012 at 12:54 PM, Aaron Hosford <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:

    Putting aside any complaints about how the system works vs. how it ought 
to: I've
    invented a few learning/AI algorithms, and some variants of existing ones, 
too,
    among other things. As an "independent researcher" myself, I'm a little 
clueless
    as to how to go about getting published. PM suggested joining IEEE or AISB 
as a
    means to do so. Any other advice? Is this the only route? Do these 
organizations
    provide assistance for total newbs?

    I aced all my undergraduate CS classes, but lost my scholarship & dropped 
out due
    to personal issues (homelessness, among other things) before I could finish 
up
    the non-major classes required to graduate from a state-run school, so I 
don't
    even have a formal education according to the system, despite my rather 
extreme
    autodidacticism. Combine this lack of credentials with a complete lack of
    experience and virtually no one to ask for advice (you guys are /it/ for 
me), and
    I'm not sure how to open this door. Any help, insight, or advice would be 
greatly
    appreciated.



    Logan wrote:

        Maybe one day, there will be Open Science, which allows the 
participation of
        any being that has knowledge to contribute, (even if they didn't spend 
tens
        of thousands and years of their lives apprenticing.) along with Open 
Studies,
        where people can participate in a study by doing an experiment at home 
and
        posting results,  and Open Journals, that actually share the 
information that
        science has accumulated.


    I have a couple of friends I'm working (very slowly) with to make this a
    possibility. Right now we're just a reserved domain (http://scipubs.com/), 
but
    eventually we hope to provide a fully functional open access publication
    platform, with a system that literally allows anyone to publish. (There 
will, of
    course, be certain fundamental standards for publication of a particular 
paper,
    primarily regarding the style.) Journals, similar to channels on YouTube, 
will
    review papers, and access to the list of papers reviewed and accepted by a
    particular journal will be visible provided you have either paid that 
journal for
    access (we take a cut to pay for operation costs) or the journal makes 
their list
    available for free. (Journals may also choose to have authors pay for the 
review
    process instead of or in addition to readers.) So, in summary:

     1. Anyone can publish for free.
     2. Anyone can read any article for free.
     3. The peer review process is still an effective filter for separating the
        serious research from that of cranks and crooks, but this is a 
value-added
        paid service.


    Our hope is that with the ability to support both open access/publication
    alongside the peer review process in the same platform, those who are
    economically, educationally, or opportunistically disadvantaged can still
    contribute to the dialog of scientific progress. Additionally, for 
researchers
    who are part of the "in" crowd but who are pressured into publishing only 
their
    most mainstream research, a non-reviewed paper could provide an alternative
    avenue for sharing exploratory/speculative papers without having to measure 
up to
    the same standards as for primary research publications.



    On Thu, Dec 20, 2012 at 10:34 AM, Piaget Modeler <[email protected]
    <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:

        Todor, thanks for Stoychev's paper on Developmental Robotics. It's 
pretty good.

        The answer is quite simple:

        Build a system and write an e-book.  (Not necessarily in that order).

        Look at Mentifex (Arthur Murray). He's done it. No bellyaching from 
him. No
        complaints.  He just works on his system,
        announces his new developments, and writes his book. I'm very impressed 
by
        his commitment.  He's a model for us all.

        If you want to attend conferences and publish papers, join an 
organization
        like IEEE or AISB and submit some papers to
        a conference. Very simple.

        Life moves on, and because you didn't get credit for some past ideas, 
that's
        life. You have to let that go and make room
        for new ideas.  Ensure that you don't repeat those mistakes, and ensure 
that
        you DO get credit for your original ideas
        in the future.

        The only one stopping you from being all that you can be is yourself.

        Be great. And let everyone know just how great you are.

        Cheers,

        ~PM.



        *AGI* | Archives <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now>
        <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/23050605-2da819ff> | 
Modify
        <https://www.listbox.com/member/?&;> Your Subscription [Powered by 
Listbox]
        <http://www.listbox.com>


    *AGI* | Archives <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now>
    <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/212726-deec6279> | Modify
    <https://www.listbox.com/member/?&;> Your Subscription     [Powered by 
Listbox]
    <http://www.listbox.com>




--
Ben Goertzel, PhD
http://goertzel.org

"My humanity is a constant self-overcoming" -- Friedrich Nietzsche
*AGI* | Archives <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now>
<https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/12987897-64924e57> | Modify
<https://www.listbox.com/member/?&;> Your
Subscription    [Powered by Listbox] <http://www.listbox.com>




-------------------------------------------
AGI
Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now
RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/21088071-f452e424
Modify Your Subscription: 
https://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=21088071&id_secret=21088071-58d57657
Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com

Reply via email to