Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
bearophile wrote:
For even bigger data you may use muds:
"On the Complexity of Processing Massive, Unordered, Distributed
Data", by Jon Feldman, S. Muthukrishnan, Anastasios Sidiropoulos,
Cliff Stein, Zoya Svitkina:
http://arxiv.org/abs/cs.CC/0611108
I've developed a skepticism towards arxiv.org. My understanding is that
it's not high-quality so a paper that only appears of it is highly
questionable.
Andrei
I'm not sure how it is in CS, but at least in physics, *everything* is
posted on arXiv -- papers, talks, lectures, etc. Since it (usually)
takes quite a while to get a paper published in a peer-reviewed journal,
it allows for rapid communication of research results. For each paper on
arXiv there is a "journal-ref" field that can be filled in when the
paper is quality-assured and published.
Another nice thing about arXiv is that it's free. Scientific journals
usually require subscriptions -- expensive ones, at that, normally paid
for by university libraries. Therefore, when I want to send someone a
link to a paper of mine, I usually direct them to the arXiv version,
since then I'm sure they can actually read it.
So I guess my point is: don't diss arXiv. :)
-Lars
