North American Network Operators Group Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical Re: Publish or (gulp) Perish
One of the downsides of peer reviewed journals is that it takes an awfully long time from submission to publication - typically a minimum of a year. In a quick moving area like network operations this can be especially problematic. One great intermediary to this are pre-print archives, especially the Arxiv archive run jointly between Cornell and Los Alamos - http://arxiv.org/ . They have a big computer science section with lots of good stuff. Also as far as journals the new Internet Mathematics is good if a bit more academically geared than operational. ----- Original Message ----- From: [email protected] Date: Thursday, March 25, 2004 6:27 am Subject: Re: Publish or (gulp) Perish > > >> Powerpoints have a hard time matching the depth of a refereed > journal>> submission, because with the powerpoint, soundbites tend > to take > >> precedence over content. > > >Attention to sidebar on page 192 of the Columbia Accident > >Investigation Board report entitled "Engineering by Viewgraphs": > >http://www.nasa.gov/columbia/caib/PDFS/VOL1/PART02.PDF > > Everybody who makes slide presentations should read this. > I know it has influenced me in trying to make my presentations > clearer and shorter and more precise. If you read nothing > else from the report, have a look at this slide reproduced > below as close as possible to the way it originally appeared > including line breaks and bulleted indentation: > > > Review Of Test Data Indicates Conservatism for Tile > Penetration > --------------------------------------------------- > > * The existing SOFI on tile test data used to create Crater > was reviewed along with STS-107 Southwest Research data > - Crater overpredicted penetration of tile coating > significantly > * Initial penetration to described by normal velocity > - Varies with volume/mass of projectile(e.g., 200ft/sec for > 3cu. In) > * Significant energy is required for the softer SOFI particle > to penetrate the relatively hard tile coating > - Test results do show that it is possible at sufficient mass > and velocity > * Conversely, once tile is penetrated SOFI can cause > significant damage > - Minor variations in total energy (above penetration level) > can cause significant tile damage > - Flight condition is significantly outside of test database > * Volume of ramp is 1920cu in vs 3 cu in for test > > The Columbia investigators zeroed in on the words "significant" > and "significantly" used 5 times on the slide with meanings varying > from "detectable in largely irrelevant calibration case study" > to "an amount of damage so that everyone dies" to "a difference > of 640-fold." None of these 5 usages appears to refer to the > technical meaning of "statistical significance." > > They also noted that the low resolution of a slide promotes > the use of compressed phrases like "Tile Penetration" whose > meaning can be ambiguous and usually is never defined. > > The slide alludes to the idea of damage to the tiles > but often avoids saying it directly referring to "penetration" > or "it" and using unclear sentence fragments. > > If you do want to see the original it is on page 95 of the > PDF file linked above. > > --Michael Dillon > > > > >
|