Optimal Testing Strategies for Infectious Diseases - H. Georgiou
Mobility Analytics and COVID-19 in Greece - H. Georgiou, C. Theodoridis, Y. Theodoridis
. Read More
October 2015
Start of the new academic season, preparing presentations, lectures and some postponed publications.More
November 2015
Well-into the new semester, starting the core work with the new R&D project, finishing postponed publications.More
|
IMPORTANT: If I'm DEFCON 2 and above, please do not disturb, unless we're in war!
Who am I ?
Informatics Systems Engineer (BSc, MSc), Machine Learning & Medical Imaging researcher (PhD), working professionally as IS/IT and R&D consultant, academic teacher in the private sector, part-time software developer, full-year scuba diver and underwater photographer.
Warning: This website is just another typical personal homepage, with lots of boring stuff about my interests and work. I tried my best to make it a useful portal for students and colleagues with similar interests, but don't stay long if you start feeling a headache.
Scientific blogging: Is it worth it? |
Friday, 17 September 2010 00:00 |
Web 2.0 technologies have enabled the merging of different types of publications into one, the Internet, with millions of authors and billions of readers. Science is not an exception. Countless articles are presented in the Web as “scientific” in content, but there is a thin line between solid science and speculation. Are personal blogs appropriate for such everyday-science content and, more importantly, can they be trusted as true? Well, blogs are not meant to publish research papers. Everybody knows that. The reason is not because of the content or the medium; it’s because of the intended audience. Many respectable public repositories of scientific papers like arxiv.org and citeseer.net contain a vast amount of true scientific knowledge. Scientific publications like Nature, Scientific American and New Scientist have their own blogging sections. Dedicated portals like Science20.com and Scientceblog.com publish thousands of science-related posts daily. There are even Facebook-like social networks for scientists, like ResearchGate and Academia.com. There is a notorious “guide for authors” (pdf) for those who wish to actually publish a research paper in one of IEEE’s scientific journals. It illustrates, in a very graphic and hilarious way, the difference between a simple statement like “1+1=2” and the way it should be presented in a more impressive scientific form. The sad thing is, it’s not very far from the truth! Everyone who’s working on research and writes such papers has at least a few similar stories to tell, where a submitted paper was rejected in one journal as insufficient, only to get published in another with honors. Do you think the “IEEE guide for authors” above is correct? Think again. The running variable z in the limit in the definition of e is incorrect, it should go to infinity instead of zero. If it was really a scientific paper and not a joke, this would be bad, really bad.
NOTE: The site is currently in testing (beta) version and several pages are still under heavy construction or empty. Please stay tunned for frequent updates and of course feel free to send feedback on any bugs, broken links, etc. |
Last Updated on Monday, 27 September 2010 12:09 |
Lurking 10-20m underwater
Attica, Greece
https://github.com/xgeorgio
Email Me