Slashdot Mirror


Randomly Generated Paper Accepted to Conference

mldqj writes "Some students at MIT wrote a program called SCIgen - An Automatic CS Paper Generator. From their website: SCIgen is a program that generates random Computer Science research papers, including graphs, figures, and citations. What's amazing is that one of their randomly generated paper was accepted to WMSCI 2005. Now they are accepting donation to fund their trip to the conference and give a randomly generated talk."

6 of 658 comments (clear)

  1. I'd hate to be a paper referee after this. by winkydink · · Score: 4, Interesting

    It's a thankless job to begin with. Now you have to approach each one with, "is this the real deal, or some bs-generated thing?"

    Oh, and a collection of my as-yet unpublished white papers will be available soon. Cheap. :)

    --

    "I'd rather be a lightning rod than a seismometer." -Ken Kesey

  2. No big surprise by ghoti · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The organizers of this stupid conference (and also some "WSEAS conference on all and everything") keep spamming me with emails about how their deadlines have been extended and how I am invited to submit a paper. This just confirms that those conferences are total crap - if not outright scams.

    Actually, a former professor of mine once did something similar. They submitted a paper that they had written by hand, but that didn't make any sense (something about evaluating footprints in dark rooms) to a conference that was known for its crap quality, and it was accepted. This broke that conference's neck, however.

    With some luck, this thing will have a similar result.

    --
    EagerEyes.org: Visualization and Visual Communication
  3. EPIC by Lord_Dweomer · · Score: 4, Interesting
    This story reminded me of the EPIC Flash (yeah yeah) video about the future of news media. Basically google ends up not just aggregating content by computer, but writing it by computer as well. Very interesting.

    --
    Buy Steampunk Clothing Online!
  4. Re:The blind publishing the blind. by kat11v · · Score: 5, Interesting
    This is a problem that plagues most legal documents, user manuals, and scientific papers. I recall being very frustrated (not to mention bored out of my mind) reading published research material for a 3rd year psychology course. Of all the people, you would think at least psychologists would appreciate clear, concise descriptions.

    Personally I think the problem is cultural and affects people who are intelligent and know it, but not intelligent enough that they feel they don't have to prove themselves. The more obscure your references are and the more complicated your train of thought, the smarter you must be, right?

    Luckly there are folks like the Plain English Campaign, " fighting for public information to be written in plain English." If you ever have to write a public document, I recommend reading through their Examples and Free Tutorials sections.

  5. Re:Patents application by EsbenMoseHansen · · Score: 5, Interesting

    You would need quite a few. Just the combination of the first 8 notes is 26^7=8,031,810,176, assuming the first note's placement is irrelevant, and assuming up to an octave's jump in value either way. That is discounting rythmic variations, which would add quite a few extra combos.

    The outcome space for a melody is astoundingly large.

    --
    Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by rulers as useful.
  6. Re:In other news... by somethinghollow · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Not many people bitch about the legislators not reviewing papers. So, why does everybody on /. bitch when Taco doesn't review a submission? If we could move /. administrator criteria to legislators, and get /. folks to care, we could maybe inact change in our government system.

    Or not.