Hot take but the importance we attach to the Millennium Prize Problems should decrease with inflation
Remote
Sophie Huiberts
@sophiehuiberts@mathstodon.xyz
mastodon 4.7.2701 Followers
350 Following
20 Posts
Joined November 05, 2022
I think today "publish more papers" is bad career advice for young people. Better to publish fewer and better work
Most good institutions, both employers and funders, have stopped counting papers. What's more, often in applications you are asked for "your 3 most important works". If you salami-sliced your work into thin papers then your 3 best papers will look anemic. No quantity of papers can save you
The only institutions that still count papers are fhe ones you don't want to end up anyway. Clearly their management consists of nitwits who will make your life miserable
Does anyone have experience with safety-critical software engineering? I have some basic but niche questions that I'd love to ask
EDIT: My questions have been answered. Thanks all who shared!
Replying to
As a treat I ate 1 billion grains of powdered sugar (about a tablespoon). Can not recommend
moving off of cleveref is so needlessly difficult. is this what finally gets me to use Typst?
our work is featured in quanta magazine! check it out https://www.quantamagazine.org/researchers-discover-the-optimal-way-to-optimize-20251013/
EATCS is now on Mastodon! 🥳 @eatcs@mathstodon.xyz
Replying to
@carloangiuli@mathstodon.xyz @jonmsterling@mathstodon.xyz @ToucanIan@mathstodon.xyz omg it works! apocalypse fully averted. thank you!!
Replying to
@jpoiret@types.pl i dont know what i am doing wrong, but i simply cannot get it to work. it keeps calling lemma's theorems
admittedly, i am also just frustrated at the ecosystem that it makes this whole change necessary. whatever internal necessitates this, its weird that it requires action from end users
Replying to
@jonmsterling Wild that they allow articles to be published without a factchecker verifying any quotes.
Replying to
@arclight Thanks for the offer! I think most of my questions have been answered already by other commenters.
(Though if you're aware of any cool applications of linear programming in your area I would love to read more about them, if you have any pointers! This probably won't be within the safety critical part, LP cannot be solved there)
Replying to
@clairemathieu Different ways of thinking and doing science. There are many different approaches that you can take to your work, and science would not progress without that freedom. As Feyerabend would say, when it comes to ways of doing science "anything goes".
In principle the freedom of CNRS is very good for accommodating that. I think of it as one of the big strengths of the institution. But not all leadership sees that and strives to support it. For example, currently CNRS strongly encourages its researchers to connect and collaborate with the other researchers in ones lab. This is a top-down recommendation, compatible with some ways of working and not with others.
Replying to
@jonmsterling You dont need to be a newspaper to have a fact checker. Quanta Magazine verified all the facts and quotes that I gave them for a recent article. It's important, and protects both the magazine and the author.
Not saying that the author doesn't deserve any blame here. But a responsible outlet would have protected the author from his mistake becoming public
Replying to
@BrKloeckner True, advice should always come from mentors in one's own area!
Replying to
@tito I think "Nobody will read the papers" is too cynical. Good institutions sign + follow DORA, which says to judge papers on their individual merit and not on venue reputation.
On the other hand, I do think its wise to always shoot for the best conference you can get into. Here, 'best' means the one that gets the most eyeballs on your work, from among the audience you want to read your work. Sometimes that means STOC/FOCS/ICALP, sometimes that means a conference for your subfield.
What I recommend students is to be mindful of which results are worth writing up. Just because you proved something, doesn't mean its exciting enough to invest the effort of making a paper out of it. Sometimes that means a result never sees the light of day, and that's fine. And sometimes you later stumble on a different & more exciting problem where your old proof technique can really shine, and then that's the right moment to put it out there.
@MonniauxD@social.sciences.re @tito@social.sciences.re ILP like Ingenious Linear Program 🤔
Replying to
@clairemathieu how does the candidate think CNRS's policies and procedures impact scientific pluriformity among researchers?
MIP European Workshop 2
October 19-21, Rome
This is my favorite event in the world. Save the date
https://www.mixedinteger.org/EUROMIP/2026/
