Rahul Savani's interests

Rahul Savani's posts

Post has attachment

Public

Gambit: Software Tools for Game Theory.

Google Summer of Code 2014 student application period is now open. Students, please refer to http://gambit-project.org/application.txt for guidance on how

to go about applying to work on Gambit.

https://www.google-melange.com/gsoc/homepage/google/gsoc2014

Google Summer of Code 2014 student application period is now open. Students, please refer to http://gambit-project.org/application.txt for guidance on how

to go about applying to work on Gambit.

https://www.google-melange.com/gsoc/homepage/google/gsoc2014

Post has attachment

Post has attachment

Post has shared content

Public

Just resigned from the EPSRC College of Reviewers. Here's my reasoning: http://inverseprobability.wordpress.com/2013/07/11/resignation-from-epsrc-college-of-reviewers/

Post has shared content

Public

" Do not believe it when it is said that open access journals can only survive on large fees by authors."

Post has shared content

Public

A couple of days ago I noticed that a recent paper of Green and Tao (http://arxiv.org/pdf/1205.1330v1.pdf) has an interesting style of bibliography: for each paper they give not just the journal where it appears but also an indication of how, if possible, to find it online. Usually this is an arXiv reference, but sometimes they say, "available from the author's homepage". Is this the way of the future? And will whoever publishes this paper allow them to keep all those arXiv references? I very much hope that the answer to the second question will be yes (and that Green and Tao will threaten to withdraw the paper if they are not allowed to keep the bibliography as it is).

While I thoroughly approve of their bibliography and hope that others will follow this practice (of course, some may already be doing so), I also think that its importance is more symbolic than practical. By that I mean that if I see a paper I want to look up, I won't copy out their arXiv reference because it will be simpler just to type some key words into Google. So maybe all that's really needed is a symbol that means "easy to find online", where that's defined to mean that if you Google a chunk of the title then you'll get a link to a pdf of the paper in one of the first few hits. And perhaps if there are papers that exist online but are hard to find, links could be given. Even better would be if we could get to the point where the symbol was applied to papers that were

While I thoroughly approve of their bibliography and hope that others will follow this practice (of course, some may already be doing so), I also think that its importance is more symbolic than practical. By that I mean that if I see a paper I want to look up, I won't copy out their arXiv reference because it will be simpler just to type some key words into Google. So maybe all that's really needed is a symbol that means "easy to find online", where that's defined to mean that if you Google a chunk of the title then you'll get a link to a pdf of the paper in one of the first few hits. And perhaps if there are papers that exist online but are hard to find, links could be given. Even better would be if we could get to the point where the symbol was applied to papers that were

**not**easy to find online. Post has shared content

Public

*"Mendeley previously had presented itself as a strong supporter of the open access moment. The last thing that many of the Mendeley users who are now running for the hills wanted to do was help improve Elsevier’s bottom line. Equally distasteful: giving Elsevier direct access to detailed information on their reading habits and workflow patterns."*

Post has shared content

Post has attachment

Public

Vote for Turing's Universal Machine.

Post has attachment

Public

Wait while more posts are being loaded