Author: Sune Fischer
Date: 12:22:10 08/20/02
Go up one level in this thread
On August 20, 2002 at 14:29:41, Miguel A. Ballicora wrote: >This is a thesis for a Masters Degree, _NOT_ a PhD. Do not forget that. >In many areas, original contributions are not required to graduate (Business). >Moreover, in many areas you do not even need a thesis, you can replace them with >more courses. In other areas of hard sciences you need some novel contribution; >however, standards in different countries are not the same at this level. At the >PhD level, standards are a little bit closer. I do not think that lack of novel >contribution is a reason for an attack (I haven't read it yet, but I think I >will). I attacked it because it has a lack of depth and original input from the author, the work is comprised of pasting it together and rephrasing it for the laymen. To me that is not doing science, but if that gets you a Masters, then he should get a masters for it. Clearly we perceive the word "masters" differently, I find it very unfortunate and confusing that the word hasn't got the same weight all over. -S. >Regards, >Miguel > > > > > > >> >>>I find it amazing that you are attacking Marcel, when his work wasn't >>>really that bad. I *wish* there were more 'bad' publications like this. >> >>There is nothing wrong with the paper as such, it reminds me of Bruce's tutorial >>which I like more than most official papers, but to give a masters for it I >>actually find offensive. It degrads my masters (when I get it) in some way. >> >>>I think that if you read through a few ICCA journals, you would >>>realize that I was being far more objective than you might think. >>> >>>The level of most publications there is far below this thesis. >> >>Haven't read them, but then I wouldn't expect them to get a degree for it. >> >>-S. >>>-- >>>GCP
This page took 0.01 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.