Archive
Christmas books for 2022
This year’s list of books for Christmas, or Isaac Newton’s birthday (in the Julian calendar in use when he was born), returns to its former length, and even includes a book published this year. My book Evidence-based Software Engineering also became available in paperback form this year, and would look great on somebodies’ desk.
The Mars Project by Wernher von Braun, first published in 1953, is a 91-page high-level technical specification for an expedition to Mars (calculated by one man and his slide-rule). The subjects include the orbital mechanics of travelling between Earth and Mars, the complications of using a planet’s atmosphere to slow down the landing craft without burning up, and the design of the spaceships and rockets (the bulk of the material). The one subject not covered is cost; von Braun’s estimated 950 launches of heavy-lift launch vehicles, to send a fleet of ten spacecraft with 70 crew, will not be cheap. I’ve no idea what today’s numbers might be.
The Fabric of Civilization: How textiles made the world by Virginia Postrel is a popular book full of interesting facts about the economic and cultural significance of something we take for granted today (or at least I did). For instance, Viking sails took longer to make than the ships they powered, and spinning the wool for the sails on King Canute‘s North Sea fleet required around 10,000 work years.
Wyclif’s Dust: Western Cultures from the Printing Press to the Present by David High-Jones is covered in an earlier post.
The Second World Wars: How the First Global Conflict Was Fought and Won by Victor Davis Hanson approaches the subject from a systems perspective. How did the subsystems work together (e.g., arms manufacturers and their customers, the various arms of the military/politicians/citizens), the evolution of manufacturing and fighting equipment (the allies did a great job here, Germany not very good, and Japan/Italy terrible) to increase production/lethality, and the prioritizing of activities to achieve aims. The 2011 Christmas books listed “Europe at War” by Norman Davies, which approaches the war from a data perspective.
Through the Language Glass: Why the world looks different in other languages by Guy Deutscher is a science driven discussion (written in a popular style) of the impact of language on the way its speakers interpret their world. While I have read many accounts of the Sapir–Whorf hypothesis, this book was the first to tell me that 70 years earlier, both William Gladstone (yes, that UK prime minister and Homeric scholar) and Lazarus Geiger had proposed theories of color perception based on the color words commonly used by the speakers of a language.
Software engineering: A great discipline for an academic fraudster
I am a sporadic reader of In the Pipeline, a blog covering drug discovery and the pharma industry, subjects about which I have no real interest but the author is a no nonsense guy whose writing I enjoy reading. A topic that regularly crops up is retraction of a published paper (i.e., effectively saying “ignore that paper we published way back when”). Reasons for retraction include a serious mistake, plagiarism of somebody else’s work or outright fabrication of data.
Retraction of papers published in software engineering journals is rare, why is that? I don’t think software engineering researchers are more/less honest than researchers in other fields. I could not find any entries on Retraction Watch.
Plagiarism certainly occurs and every now and again a paper is retracted for this reason.
Corrections to previously published papers certainly occur on a regular basis, but I don’t recall seeing a retraction because of a serious error (but then I rarely get to gossip around the coffee table in university departments and am not that well up on such goings on).
Researchers are certainly not above using the subset of a benchmark that shines the most favorable light on their work, or simply performing misleading comparisons. Researchers who do such things are seem more as an embarrassment than a threat to academic integrity, they are certainly not in the same league as those who fabricate data
Fabrication of data in software engineering? I’m sure it goes on, but unless the people responsible own up I think it is unlikely to be detected (unless the claims are truely over the top). There is no culture of replication in software engineering or of building on other peoples’ work (everybody is into doing their own thing); two very serious problems, but not the topic of this discussion.
In fact software engineering is the ideal discipline for an academic fraudster: replication is very rare, everyone doing their own thing, a culture of poor/nonexistent record keeping and experimental data is rarely kept past the replacement of the machine on which it sits (I am regularly told this when I email authors asking for a copy of their raw data for my book). Even in disciplines whose characteristics are at the other end of the culture scale, it can take a long time for fraud to be uncovered.
From time to time authors I contact tell me that the numbers appearing in the published paper are incorrect; often there is an offer of the correct numbers and sometimes a vague recollection of what they might be. Sometimes authors don’t reply to my email, is the data fake or is talking to me not worth their time (I have received replies to this effect)?
Am I worried about fraud in software engineering research? No, incorrect data in published work is more likely to occur because of clerical mistakes, laziness or incompetence.
Recent Comments