[Corpora-List] Journal of Interesting Negative Results

From: Stan Szpakowicz (szpak@site.uottawa.ca)
Date: Wed Apr 19 2006 - 23:10:52 MET DST

  • Next message: Rens: "[Corpora-List] Lecturer / Assistant Professor in Natural Language Processing, University of St Andrews, UK"

                %%-----------------%%----------------%%
                Journal of Interesting Negative Results
                %%-----------------%%----------------%%

    In our scientific explorations, sooner or later we try out ideas
    which, sometimes for quite deep reasons, fail at the experimental
    stage. There is a palpable bias towards positive results at journals,
    conferences, workshop and other outlets for reporting scientific
    work. Negative results, however, can be just as interesting. We often
    learn more from failures than from successes.

    We are starting JINR, a new on-line Journal of Interesting Negative
    Results in Natural Language Processing and Machine Learning. We hope
    that it will become a forum for research ideas which appear good but,
    upon rigorous examination, can be shown not to lead to good results.
    It may also become a place to publish counter-examples to accepted
    but sometimes unproven truths.

    While we focus on NLP and ML, we will welcome contributions from
    other areas of Artificial Intelligence.

    Please visit the JINR home at <http://jinr.site.uottawa.ca>.

                           %%------%%------%%

    We invite submission of new work along the lines of our bias towards
    scientifically proven negative results. We envisage four categories.

    1. A regular paper presents strong intuitions and compelling ideas,
    proven wrong in thorough and well-conducted experiments. The
    experiments should be described in such a way that they can be
    reproduced. The negative results should be explained and justified,
    along with the reasons why the idea did not lead to the predicted
    results. The lessons learned should be clearly stated.

    2. A communication gives counter-examples to accepted conjectures or
    to previously published results. We expect the same technical and
    presentation quality as in regular papers.

    3. A letter to the Editors makes a statement of opinion on issues
    specific to the journal. The editorial board will decide how
    appropriate it is to publish each letter.

    4. Squibs and Discussions include short presentations of issues and
    ideas related to negative results in specific areas or domains, the
    effect of such results on research, and other ideas of interest to
    the journal readership.

                           %%------%%------%%

    Vivi Nastase and Stan Szpakowicz
    University of Ottawa

    -- 
    Stan Szpakowicz, PhD, Professor  613-562-5800/6687 /~\ The ASCII Ribbon
    SITE, Computer Science       szpak@site.uottawa.ca \ / Campaign Against
    University of Ottawa    www.site.uottawa.ca/~szpak  X     HTML Email
    



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Apr 19 2006 - 23:43:00 MET DST