Journal of Interesting Negative Results in Natural Language Processing and Machine Learning

I often rant about the bias we find in modern science toward positive results. That is, the typical research paper in Computer Science is about some new technique that improves over the previous techniques. Not everyone focuses on these sort of papers, but they are the easiest to get accepted and they are often not very difficult to write. It is often easy to pick a problem and find some way to improve some existing technique. Is this worth your time though? And more importantly, why would a care about a reader?

(I am guilty of writing such papers myself too!)

Well, some people agree because I just found out about the Journal of Interesting Negative Results in Natural Language Processing and Machine Learning. What a cool title! It is also a pretty serious venture since I recognize a few names such as Guy Lapalme and Stan Matwin.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

To create code blocks or other preformatted text, indent by four spaces:

    This will be displayed in a monospaced font. The first four 
    spaces will be stripped off, but all other whitespace
    will be preserved.
    
    Markdown is turned off in code blocks:
     [This is not a link](http://example.com)

To create not a block, but an inline code span, use backticks:

Here is some inline `code`.

For more help see http://daringfireball.net/projects/markdown/syntax