June 21, that authors of the General Network Dismantling paper sent me a reply with their comments on this blog post. You can read it here. I will comment on it later. This post is about some recent experiences and thoughts of reproducing the computational results of a paper. Thoughts about computational reproducibility The reproducibility […]
Category: Scientific practice
The importance of being earnest about the importance of nodes
One of the problems network science sets out to solve is to find important nodes. Of course, what is important depends on the context, but an applied scientist coming to network science for an answer probably has a clear idea of what it means in her study system. There is no shortage of methods in […]
Not so great paper titles
Following up on the previous post on great paper titles, I have some scattered thoughts about how to make a lousy paper title too. In retrospect, I have a fair share of such myself and many papers that probably would be read more if I only had given some more thought to the title. Here […]
Great paper titles
This is a repost of something I wrote two years ago . . I was going to steal some new ones from paper-title connoisseur Sebastian Ahnert but changed my mind. As for other types of human-made stuff, the name of a paper could be as important as the content. For movies, I once had the theory that X! […]
Female pioneers in our field
Science is a man’s world. My field is not the most macho, but still, it’s worth mentioning some unsung female pioneers. Working on our essay about simulation in social science, I learned about some I didn’t know of before: Helen Hall Jennings—was behind both the methods and data collection of Jacob Moreno’s “sociograms.” Even though there […]
Petter Holme 