Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Ask HN: What are your favorite scholarly papers? Why?

news.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 90 posts

Re: Ask HN: What are your favorite scholarly papers? Why?

#51

Post by sytelus »

alphaBetaGamma wrote: post #35

Einstein, Albert. "On the electrodynamics of moving bodies." Annalen der Physik 17.891 (1905): 50. http://ganapathymani.com/On%20the%20electrodymics%20of%20mov... This paper establishes special relativity, and is remarquable for how clear it is, revolutionizing physics while using only elementary math. The first "Kinematical" part in particular does not use anything more complex mathematically than Pythagorus theorem…

I've attempted reading this paper about half dozen time and no, it's far from "clear". The language and description of the paper requires a LOT of context and understanding of 1900s state of world. There are quite a few "companians" that can help. Here's snippet from [1]:

Modern readers turning to Einstein’s famous 1905 paper on special relativity may not find what they expect. Its title, “On the electrodynamics of moving bodies,” gives no inkling that it will develop an account of space and time that will topple Newton’s system. Even its first paragraph just calls to mind an elementary experimental result due to Faraday concerning the interaction of a magnet and conductor.

[1] http://www.pitt.edu/~jdnorton/papers/companion.pdf

Re: Ask HN: What are your favorite scholarly papers? Why?

#52

Post by tempestn »

Common risk factors in the returns on stocks and bonds (1993)

http://rady.ucsd.edu/faculty/directory/valkanov/pub/classes/...

The foundation of the Three-Factor model, which shows how market returns can be very accurately described using exposure to market, small, and value factors (as well as term and default factors, primarily used for fixed income). The foundation of modern value investing.

A Stand-Alone, Split-Phase Current-Sourced Inverter With Novel Energy Storage

http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpl/login.jsp?tp=&arnumber=468271...

There's nothing particularly special about this paper except that it was accepted by IEEE Transactions on Power Electronics and I wrote it. :P

Re: Ask HN: What are your favorite scholarly papers? Why?

#54

Post by e12e »

I'm not quite sure what's meant by "scholary papers", but I really enjoy(ed) Fielding's Ph.d thesis on "REST":

http://www.ics.uci.edu/~fielding/pubs/dissertation/top.htm

Mostly because, it's not actually about just REST, but the way he derives REST as a reasonable approach to architect hypermedia/hypertext "applications" (In quotes, because, he's not really talking about "web apps" -- he mentions some other patterns that do describe "web apps" though).

I have the impression few people read and understood his paper, and run around with REST like others run around with MVC. Which brings us to:

Trygve M. H. Reenskaug's "MVC" (neé Model-View-Controller-User): http://heim.ifi.uio.no/~trygver/themes/mvc/mvc-index.html

and, newer, less known: "DCI - A new Role Based Paradigm for specifying collaborating objects":

http://heim.ifi.uio.no/~trygver/themes/babyide/babyide-index...

I think that sums up the "papers" I generally refer back to, and find myself frustrated that so few people seem to have read and/or understood. Which leads to strange discussions and unhealthy re-inventions and "improvements".

Oh, I really enjoy some of the work of VPRI/Alan Kay -- but they've been rather thin on useful papers, as far as I can tell. I did enjoy a paper on Croquet's TeaTime protocol/world model -- but sadly I can't seem to find it... hang on, I think it might be this one here:

"Designing croquet's TeaTime: a real-time, temporal environment for active object cooperation":

http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1094861

All less impressive than Shannon, Einstein, Knuth etc... but I really find those interesting.

Re: Ask HN: What are your favorite scholarly papers? Why?

#55

Post by e12e »

karmacondon wrote: post #44

A paper about making video game characters act more like real people, trained by having people simulate interactions in a restaurant setting. http://www.media.mit.edu/cogmac/publications/orkin_aamas2009... . Not ground breaking by any means, but it's the only time I've genuinely laughed out loud when reading a paper.

Oh, this reminds me of Bartle's "HEARTS, CLUBS, DIAMONDS, SPADES: PLAYERS WHO SUIT MUDS":

http://mud.co.uk/richard/hcds.htm

Much for the same reason I like Filedings REST thesis (see other comment in this thread): the reasoning that goes into it. The "types" have since been "debunked" -- but IMNHO that sort of misses the point: that he has an interesting way of looking at what makes a game fun, and how things like lack of automapping can stimulate player communication.

Re: Ask HN: What are your favorite scholarly papers? Why?

#57

Post by aaron695 »

tokenadult wrote: post #41
aaron695 wrote: post #24

"Thirty years of research on race differences in cognitive ability" http://psychology.uwo.ca/faculty/rushtonpdfs/PPPL1.pdf It made me realise how political science can be and how facts on large issues can be covered up for political reasons.

It made me realise how political science can be and how facts on large issues can be covered up for political reasons. You mean all the facts that Ruston left out made you realize that? I hope that's what you mean, as that paper is a dog. Here's a better paper on closely related topics, by authors who have advanced the research considerably: Nisbett, R. E., Aronson, J., Blair, C., Dickens, W., Flynn, J., Halpern, D.…

The paper is not perfect, but it let me question the reality of the world around me and how much was real and how much was constructed.

I find papers that challenge my ideas more enlightening than ones that reinforce them. Which obviously makes sense I guess.

The paper I linked I considered reputable enough, in a topic known to be difficult, to be of note. Every paper has issues, the trick is working out if the issues kill the paper or not.

Re: Ask HN: What are your favorite scholarly papers? Why?

#58

Post by teekert »

"Hallmarks of Cancer: The Next Generation" http://www.cell.com/cell/pdf/S0092-8674%2811%2900127-9.pdf A paper that gives a nice frame of reference for understanding and talking about the biology of cancer. This paper is the follow-up of the original Hallmarks of cancer by Hanahan and Weinberg (2000).

Re: Ask HN: What are your favorite scholarly papers? Why?

#59

Post by eli_gottlieb »

Favorite PL paper for balancing practicality and theory: http://ropas.snu.ac.kr/~bruno/papers/TypeClasses.pdf

Favorite paper/dissertation for sheer simplicity, elegance, and far-reaching power of the approach to the problem: http://web.mit.edu/vkm/www/vkm-dissertation.pdf

Re: Ask HN: What are your favorite scholarly papers? Why?

#60

Post by stiff »

e12e wrote: post #54

I'm not quite sure what's meant by "scholary papers", but I really enjoy(ed) Fielding's Ph.d thesis on "REST": http://www.ics.uci.edu/~fielding/pubs/dissertation/top.htm Mostly because, it's not actually about just REST, but the way he derives REST as a reasonable approach to architect hypermedia/hypertext "applications" (In quotes, because, he's not really talking about "web apps" -- he mentions some other patterns…

The REST thesis, whatever merit it may otherwise have, is also a prime example of the academic style of writing going horribly wrong, though. You could communicate the important novel points of this text in 5-10 pages of clear prose, instead the thesis goes on and on and bathes in vague generalities, introduces lots of jargon that contributes little and so on. It reads like something from the philosophy department, or the kind of writing that Orwell mocks in "Politics and the English Language". This is the reason why to this day many people who use the term REST do not really understand what it means. Compare it to how Watson and Crick communicated their fundamental discoveries:

http://www.nature.com/nature/dna50/watsoncrick.pdf

Post reply on HN