WHAT DOES IT MEAN?

PLEASE CITE APPROPRIATELY. Yes. That is from the responding email when I requested a paper which cannot be found online. That last sentence is kind of offending. It reminds me of your opinion of insecurity of some people: the degree of security is a nondecreasing function of people’s competence.

So is the case of this paper: English problem such as
‘On the other hand, …. On the other hand’. Five levels 0,1,2,3,5. I know there are five levels, but shouldn’t it be 0,1,2,3,4? Equation (1) and (4) are apparently wrong. They give the proposed heuristic a fancy name. But it is simply a rolling horizon scheme, hardly a new heuristic…

To be fair, at least the author sent me the paper. But isn’t it that bar too low?

REVIEW

This is the third time I review a paper. I find one problem in academia very distasteful. Many people work on the same problem for many years, with each publication justified by just an epsilon improvement. Of course, they can justify such approach as conducting a focused research with a strong theme. It is just not my taste: how boring the life would be!

The paper I am reviewing falls in this category. The original paper solve an interesting convex optimization problem decently:
min_{x,y} f(x,y) s.t. x+yle C. The following up paper, however, simply replaces the constraint with a convex term in the objective function: min_{x,y} f(x,y) + a(x+y-C)^+. What a boring paper:(

Not so boring

Even if you read books, which might be the most boring ones in the world, you may burst into laughs sometimes.

“Stata displays this partly for the entertianment value. Placing something on the screen periodicaly convinces you that your computer is still working.”

I thought you always wanted the sexy one

“The argument over style versus substance makes Sen. Clinton a little like the car dealer trying to persuade a buyer that the solid but somewhat staid sedan she offers is a better bet than the sexy but potentially unreliable sports car available down the street.” – Gerald F. Seib, Will Obama Deliver the Beef? in today’s WSJ.

Plus, this one is sexy yet reliable. How can you possibly pass? :) Check out the position papers on http://www.barackobama.com/.