https://acawiki.org/api.php?action=feedcontributions&feedformat=atom&user=Spanther 2026-04-30T10:15:40Z User contributions MediaWiki 1.31.12 https://acawiki.org/index.php?title=The_dynamics_of_mass_interaction&diff=6814 2011-10-29T17:47:34Z

<p>Spanther: Reverted edits by Yaron Koren (talk) to last revision by Jodi.a.schneider</p> <hr /> <div>{{Summary<br /> |title=The dynamics of mass interaction<br /> |authors=Steve Whittaker, Loren Terveen, Will Hill, Lynn Cherny<br /> |tags=USENET, innovation, collaboration, <br /> |summary=Published in ''Computer Supported Cooperative Work'' in 1998 by a series of authors from AT&amp;T research labs, [[The dynamics of mass interaction]] is a major quantitive analysis of USENET.<br /> <br /> In many ways, the article can be seen as building on [[Managing the virtual commons: Cooperation and conflict in computer communities|Kollock and Smith (1996)]]. While the previous work was largely theoretical, descriptive, and qualitative, this paper is more analytically focused and aims to answer a long series of hypotheses about how cooperation works online.<br /> <br /> The paper uses a dataset taken from a random subset of 500 news groups on USENET taken over a 6 months period. They first present &quot;demographic&quot; information characterizing the nature of interaction on USENET (e.g., average of 24 posts per day) and the fact that vast majority of initiating messages on USENET never get a response.<br /> <br /> Most of their article tests the &quot;common ground model&quot; that explains that establishing common ground will be important to mass interaction. They measure the need for common ground through size, number of posters and moderated-ness. They measure common ground increasing techniques through FAQs, lower cross-posting, and longer messages. These are tested in a series of 9 hypothesis with mixed results.<br /> <br /> They find evidence for a large degree of ''participation inequalities'' and find frequent evidence of cross-posting. Most hypotheses about conversational strategies are confirmed but dis-confirming evidence for a relationship between conversational strategy and interactivity. Confusingly, they find that strategies like cross-posting seem to be good for interactivity. They conclude with a reference to [[The strength of weak ties|Granovetter]] and a call for the incorporation of weak ties into a theory of &quot;common ground&quot;.<br /> |relevance=The paper has been cited over a hundred times, and primary by literature discuissing either USENET or online discussion groups more broadly.<br /> |journal=Proceedings of the 1998 ACM conference on Computer supported cooperative work<br /> |pub_date=1998<br /> |doi=10.1145/289444.289500<br /> |subject=Computer Science<br /> |pub_open_access=<br /> }}</div>

Spanther https://acawiki.org/index.php?title=AcaWiki:Top_100_Papers&diff=6313 2011-09-12T01:28:07Z

<p>Spanther: /* Sociology Papers */</p> <hr /> <div>We are driving towards gathering summaries of the Top 100 academic papers in the world. This is a large effort to increase the number of our papers, get more students, more researchers, and academics to know about the project and share their specific knowledge. We need your specific expertise to make this project sucessful. <br /> <br /> {{RightTOCLevels|limit=2}}<br /> <br /> = HOWTO =<br /> <br /> The [https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=28656 original idea came from the community].<br /> <br /> To make this work we need to:<br /> <br /> * (DONE) Create a list of the Top 20 Domains<br /> * [[Help:Editing|Help edit this wiki]] (its open for you to help with!)<br /> * Create sources per domain where to pull from.<br /> * Develop leaders per domain<br /> * Get at least 5 papers per domain<br /> ** Think that another paper is more important than the 5 already listed? [[Special:AddData/Summary|Summarize it]] and add it to the list!<br /> <br /> = Additional Resources =<br /> <br /> * [http://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/1168/what-papers-should-everyone-read What papers should everyone read?] - Theoretical Computer Science<br /> <br /> * [http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/10/09/1065676090723.html The five most cited papers]<br /> <br /> * [http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/stats/articles Most Cited Computer Science Articles]<br /> <br /> * [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_important_publications_in_computer_science List of important publications in computer science]<br /> <br /> * [http://in-cites.com/nobel/index.html The 100 Most-Cited Scientists]<br /> <br /> * [http://isihighlycited.com/ ISIHighlyCited.com]<br /> <br /> * [http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/story.asp?storyCode=405956&amp;sectioncode=26 Most cited authors of books in the humanities, 2007]<br /> <br /> * [http://archive.sciencewatch.com/sept-oct2003/sw_sept-oct2003_page2.htm Most-Cited Researchers, 1983-2002]<br /> <br /> * [http://repec.org/ Research Papers in Economics]<br /> <br /> * [http://www.harzing.com/pp_gs.htm Google Scholar - a new data source for citation analysis]<br /> <br /> * [http://wokinfo.com/products_tools/analytical/jcr/ Journal Citation Reports]<br /> <br /> * [http://www.librijournal.org/pdf/2005-4pp170-180.pdf Google Scholar: The New Generation of Citation Indexes]<br /> <br /> * [http://www.librijournal.org/ International Journal of Libraries and Information Services]<br /> <br /> = Collaboration and Communication =<br /> <br /> ''Please join us in spreading the news about this drive, and join us in chat as well!''<br /> <br /> * Public Social Networks<br /> * [[AcaWiki:Communications|Our Communication Channels]]<br /> <br /> = Top 100 Papers =<br /> <br /> == Anthropology ==<br /> <br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Arts and Literature ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> * Username: Spanther<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> =====[[Death of the author]]=====<br /> =====[[What is an author?]]=====<br /> =====[[Why conceptual writing? Why now?]]=====<br /> =====[[The fate of echo]]=====<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Astronomy ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Biology ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Business ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Chemistry ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Clinical Research ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Computer Science ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Stack Exchange: [http://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/1168/what-papers-should-everyone-read What papers should everyone read?]<br /> ** NB: User contributions on Stack Exchange are licensed under [http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/ cc-wiki] with [http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2009/06/attribution-required/ attribution required]<br /> * Turing Award winners [http://twitter.com/RandomlyWalking/status/82385732467032064 (WP)], including papers they've written and the [http://www.informatik.uni-trier.de/~ley/db/journals/cacm/turing.html Turing Award lectures]<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> =====A mathematical theory of communication=====<br /> <br /> &quot;[http://guohanwei.51.net/code/A%20Mathematical%20Theory%20of%20Communication.pdf A mathematical theory of communication]&quot; by Claude Shannon, classics of information theory. Very readable. ([http://cm.bell-labs.com/cm/ms/what/shannonday/shannon1948.pdf Alternative link].)<br /> <br /> cc-by-sa [http://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/1168/what-papers-should-everyone-read/1172#1172 attribution]<br /> <br /> ===== On Computable Numbers, with an Application to the Entscheidungsproblem =====<br /> <br /> The 1936 paper that arguably started computer science:<br /> <br /> Alan Turing, &quot;[http://scholar.google.com/scholar?cluster=16882511564349146333 On Computable Numbers, with an Application to the Entscheidungsproblem]&quot;, Proceedings of the London Mathematical Society s2-42, 230–265, 1937. [http://dx.doi.org/10.1112/plms/s2-42.1.230 doi: 10.1112/plms/s2-42.1.230]<br /> <br /> In just 36 pages, Turing formulates (but does not name) the Turing Machine, recasts Gödel's famous First Incompleteness Theorem in terms of computation, describes the concept of universality, and in the appendix shows that computability by Turing machines is equivalent to computability by λ-definable functions (as studied by Church and Kleene).<br /> <br /> cc-by-sa [http://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/1168/what-papers-should-everyone-read/1170#1170 attribution]<br /> <br /> ===== Can Programming Be Liberated from the von Neumann Style? =====<br /> <br /> &quot;[http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.72.2622&amp;rep=rep1&amp;type=pdf Can Programming Be Liberated from the von Neumann Style? A Functional Style and Its Algebra of Programs]&quot; by John Backus. This is the 1977 ACM Turing Award Lecture in which Backus introduces functional programming to the world. ACM honored Backus with this award for his seminal work on FORTRAN and for being the B in BNF notation used for describing programming language syntax. I found this work to be really inspiring. It caused me to look at computers and programming languages in a whole new way.<br /> <br /> It also represents the kind of paper I wish there were more of. It exposes the inspiration and thought processing behind a nest of ideas without the rigorous but limiting tone of a research paper. It is a shame that researchers have to wait for an opportunity like the ACM Turing Award to be able to express themselves in this mode. Of course, few researchers can write like John Backus. This papers clarity of vision amazes me.<br /> <br /> cc-by-sa [http://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/1168/what-papers-should-everyone-read/6785#6785 attribution] (comments from Paul Topping)<br /> <br /> == Economics ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Education ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> ** [[User:Viovio]]<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> =====[[Crisis in the humanities]]=====<br /> * Summarized! :)<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Engineering ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Geosciences ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Health ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Mathematics ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * [http://mathoverflow.net/questions/2144 mathoverflow: A single paper everyone should read?]<br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> ===== The Yang-Mills Equations over Riemann Surfaces ===== <br /> The Yang-Mills Equations over Riemann Surfaces<br /> Author(s): M. F. Atiyah and R. Bott Source: Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series A, Mathematical and Physical Sciences, Vol. 308, No. 1505 (Mar. 17, 1983), pp. 523-615 Published by: The Royal Society [http://www.jstor.org/stable/37156 copy from JSTOR} [http://dx.doi.org/10.1098/rsta.1983.0017 find by DOI]<br /> : One professor called it &quot;the basis for truly 21st century mathematics.&quot; It is also reportedly accessible by beginning graduate students with some exposure to differential geometry and suitable for independent study or as a reading course. It is a 93 page paper and develops a lot of fundamental constructions and ideas from scratch. Here is [http://www.ams.org/mathscinet-getitem?mr=702806 Martin Guest's review on MathSciNet]. -Justin Kerry at [http://mathoverflow.net/questions/2144/a-single-paper-everyone-should-read/15347#15347 cc-by-sa attribution]<br /> : For about 5 years I carried my copy with me everywhere I went, in an increasingly decrepit 3-ring binder weighed down by page after page of my own notes and explanations. One day, at a conference, a dispute arose over whether the main result of the paper held with integral coefficients or required one to work over the rationals. In the flash of an eye, four or five of us pulled out our copies and opened to the relevant page. Luckily, I was right: integral coefficients. The first time I left home without the paper, it felt like a rite of passage. Or at least that's the way I remember it. – Dan Ramras at [http://mathoverflow.net/questions/2144/a-single-paper-everyone-should-read/15347#15347 cc-by-sa attribution]<br /> <br /> ===== On formally undecidable propositions of Principia Mathematica and related systems =====<br /> Kurt Gödel's [http://www.csee.wvu.edu/~xinl/library/papers/math/Godel.pdf On formally undecidable propositions of Principia Mathematica and related systems]. See [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_Formally_Undecidable_Propositions_of_Principia_Mathematica_and_Related_Systems its Wikipedia article]<br /> <br /> cc-by-sa [http://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/1168/what-papers-should-everyone-read/2218#2218 attribution]<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Medicine ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Neuroscience ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Philosophy ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> =====[[The importance of Bruno Latour for philosophy]]=====<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Physics ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> * Posting a question at [http://physicsoverflow.com/ Physics Overflow] might yield some interesting responses<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> =====The Unreasonable Effectiveness of Mathematics in the Natural Sciences=====<br /> [http://www.ipod.org.uk/reality/reality_wigner.pdf The Unreasonable Effectiveness of Mathematics in the Natural Sciences by Eugene Wigner]<br /> <br /> [http://mathoverflow.net/questions/2144/a-single-paper-everyone-should-read/43207#43207 cc-by-sa attribution]<br /> <br /> =====Quantum Mechanical Computers=====<br /> <br /> [http://www.springerlink.com/content/p1x27746x51x52mm/ Quantum Mechanical Computers (PDF) by Richard Feynman].<br /> <br /> :He introduces the idea of quantum computation, describes quantum circuits, explains how classical circuits can be simulated by quantum circuits, and shows how quantum circuits can compute functions without lots of garbage qubits (using uncomputation).<br /> <br /> :He then shows how any classical circuit can be encoded into a time-independent Hamiltonian! His proof goes through for quantum circuits too, therefore showing that time evolving Hamiltonians is BQP-hard! His Hamiltonian construction is also used in the proof of the quantum version of the Cook-Levin theorem, proved by Kitaev, which shows that k-local Hamiltonian is QMA-complete. cc-by-sa [http://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/1168/what-papers-should-everyone-read/1177#1177 attribution]<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Psychology ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * [http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1698090 &quot;Why Do Humans Reason? Arguments for an Argumentative Theory,&quot;] by Hugo Mercier and Dan Sperber, Behavioral and Brain Sciences, Vol. 34, No. 2, pp. 57-74, 2011<br /> : Jonathan Haidt [http://edge.org/conversation/the-argumentative-theory said] &quot;so important that the abstracts... should be posted in psychology departments all over the country.&quot; and that “the article is one of my favorite papers of the last ten years. I believe that they have solved one of the most important and longstanding puzzles in psychology: why are we so good at reasoning in some cases, but so hopelessly biased in others?<br /> <br /> =====[[The mirror stage as formative of the function of the I as revealed in psychoanalytic experience]]=====<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Sociology ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Sociology Papers ====<br /> Sociology is a big field with many branches (e.g. network research, health communication, media effects, organizational communication, classical sociology, etc.). Perhaps it would be better to make top 5's for each?<br /> <br /> * Bowker, G. C., &amp; Star, S. L. (1999). [[Sorting things out: Classification and its consequences]]. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. <br /> * Granovetter, M. (1983). &quot;[[The strength of weak ties: A network theory revisited]]&quot;. Sociological Theory 1: 201–233. doi:[http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/202051 10.2307/202051]. JSTOR 202051.<br /> * Watts, D. J. (2004). [[The new science of networks]]. Annual Review of Sociology, 30(1), 243-270. DOI:[http://dx.doi.org/10.1146/annurev.soc.30.020404.104342 10.1146/annurev.soc.30.020404.104342], see also [http://enwp.org/Mark_Granovetter#The_strength_of_weak_ties]<br /> =====[[Reification and utopia in mass culture]]=====<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> <br /> [[Category:Activity]]</div>

Spanther https://acawiki.org/index.php?title=Reification_and_utopia_in_mass_culture&diff=6312 2011-09-12T01:27:16Z

<p>Spanther: </p> <hr /> <div>{{Summary<br /> |title=Reification and utopia in mass culture<br /> |authors=Frederic Jameson<br /> |url=http://www.jstor.org/pss/466409<br /> |tags=sociology, <br /> |summary=In this influential article, Jameson aims to complicate the traditional notions of mass (or popular) culture and high culture. Traditionally the two spheres are defined in opposition to each other and generally attributed to either popularity or elitism. Jameson reworks this definition through the help of thinkers associated with the Frankfurt School and the Marxist theory of reification. He writes:<br /> <br /> “...it seems to me that we must rethink the opposition high culture/mass culture in such a way that the emphasis on evaluation to which it has traditionally given rise—and which however the binary system of value operates (mass culture is popular and thus more authentic than high culture, high culture is autonomous and, therefore, utterly incomparable to a degraded mass culture) tends to function in some timeless realm of absolute aesthetic judgment—is replaced by a genuinely historical and dialectical approach to these phenomena.”<br /> <br /> Other ways Jameson rethinks this opposition is through the various ways culture is commodified and instrumentalized. And in particular, how this instrumentalization occurs via images and utility—or culture as a “means to an end.” Here, Jameson cites contemporary books as an example of reading “for the end” wherein readers “transform the transparent flow of language as much as possible into material images and objects we can consume.”<br /> <br /> Later in the essay Jameson argues that while the Frankfurt School provide a helpful lens with which to analyze mass and high culture, in today’s era of late-capitalism their theoretical insights are a bit outdated. For instance, Jameson suggests, “the ‘popular’ as such no longer exists... the commodity production of contemporary or industrial mass culture has nothing whatsoever to do, and nothing in common, with older forms of popular or folk art.”<br /> <br /> Jameson then goes on to point to various cultural works that have interpenetrated high and low culture. He also references several theoreticians who have paved the way for this type of thinking that moves beyond the Frankfurt School and their limited modes of analysis and critique.<br /> |journal=Social Text, Duke University Press<br /> |pub_date=1979<br /> |subject=Sociology<br /> }}</div>

Spanther https://acawiki.org/index.php?title=Reification_and_utopia_in_mass_culture&diff=6311 2011-09-12T01:26:06Z

<p>Spanther: Created page with &quot;{{Summary |title=Reification and utopia in mass culture |authors=Frederic Jameson |url=http://www.jstor.org/pss/466409 |summary=In this influential article, Jameson aims to comp...&quot;</p> <hr /> <div>{{Summary<br /> |title=Reification and utopia in mass culture <br /> |authors=Frederic Jameson<br /> |url=http://www.jstor.org/pss/466409<br /> |summary=In this influential article, Jameson aims to complicate the traditional notions of mass (or popular) culture and high culture. Traditionally the two spheres are defined in opposition to each other and generally attributed to either popularity or elitism. Jameson reworks this definition through the help of thinkers associated with the Frankfurt School and the Marxist theory of reification. He writes:<br /> <br /> “...it seems to me that we must rethink the opposition high culture/mass culture in such a way that the emphasis on evaluation to which it has traditionally given rise—and which however the binary system of value operates (mass culture is popular and thus more authentic than high culture, high culture is autonomous and, therefore, utterly incomparable to a degraded mass culture) tends to function in some timeless realm of absolute aesthetic judgment—is replaced by a genuinely historical and dialectical approach to these phenomena.”<br /> <br /> Other ways Jameson rethinks this opposition is through the various ways culture is commodified and instrumentalized. And in particular, how this instrumentalization occurs via images and utility—or culture as a “means to an end.” Here, Jameson cites contemporary books as an example of reading “for the end” wherein readers “transform the transparent flow of language as much as possible into material images and objects we can consume.”<br /> <br /> Later in the essay Jameson argues that while the Frankfurt School provide a helpful lens with which to analyze mass and high culture, in today’s era of late-capitalism their theoretical insights are a bit outdated. For instance, Jameson suggests, “the ‘popular’ as such no longer exists... the commodity production of contemporary or industrial mass culture has nothing whatsoever to do, and nothing in common, with older forms of popular or folk art.”<br /> <br /> Jameson then goes on to point to various cultural works that have interpenetrated high and low culture. He also references several theoreticians who have paved the way for this type of thinking that moves beyond the Frankfurt School and their limited modes of analysis and critique.<br /> }}</div>

Spanther https://acawiki.org/index.php?title=The_mirror_stage_as_formative_of_the_function_of_the_I_as_revealed_in_psychoanalytic_experience&diff=6310 2011-09-11T22:49:38Z

<p>Spanther: </p> <hr /> <div>{{Summary<br /> |title=The mirror stage as formative of the function of the I as revealed in psychoanalytic experience<br /> |authors=Jacques Lacan<br /> |url=http://www.soundandsignifier.com/files/Lacan_Mirror_Stage.pdf<br /> |tags=psychology, philosophy,<br /> |summary=Lacan's conception of the mirror stage has been called his most famous and significant contribution to the field of psychoanalysis. It's also essential reading for anyone interested in Lacan due to the prevalence of the mirror stage's concepts found throughout his entire oeuvre. <br /> <br /> This particular rendition of the mirror stage was &quot;delivered at the 16th International Congress of Psychoanalysis, Zürich, July 17, 1949&quot;. It is short in length, but quite dense and difficult. I'll attempt to summarize the mirror stage's main features below.<br /> <br /> Primarily concerned with identity, subjectivity and fantasy, Lacan claims the mirror stage takes place between the ages of six to eighteen months when an infant recognizes its self in connection with the image of the specular self. The result is a fantasized, fictional self that is unified and made whole via the image in the mirror, or “the transformation that takes place in the subject when he assumes an image.”<br /> <br /> Due to the self and the specular self not being identical, there is a discontinuity between the two that is psychically alienating. This gap or lack of a unified sense of self, Lacan argues, is where desire stems from—a desire to become whole again. The mirror stage in this sense paradoxically contributes to the “decentering” and unification of the subject through a continuous process of repetition. The following sentence sums this idea up best:<br /> <br /> “The mirror stage is a drama whose internal thrust is precipitated from insufficiency to anticipation—and which manufacturse fo the subject, caught up in the lure of spatial identification, the succession of phantasies that extends from a fragmented body-image to a form of its totality that I shall call orthopaedic—and, lastly, to the assumption of the armour of an alienating identity, which will mark with its rigid structure the subject’s entire mental development.”<br /> <br /> It’s also important to note that Lacan’s notion of the mirror stage shares affinities with Freud’s conception of identification and narcissism—the latter contributing to the formation of the ego.<br /> |relevance=See also [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mirror_stage Wikipedia article]<br /> |journal=First articlie from Ecrits: A Selection<br /> |pub_date=1966<br /> |subject=Psychology<br /> }}</div>

Spanther https://acawiki.org/index.php?title=AcaWiki:Top_100_Papers&diff=6309 2011-09-11T22:47:46Z

<p>Spanther: /* Papers */</p> <hr /> <div>We are driving towards gathering summaries of the Top 100 academic papers in the world. This is a large effort to increase the number of our papers, get more students, more researchers, and academics to know about the project and share their specific knowledge. We need your specific expertise to make this project sucessful. <br /> <br /> {{RightTOCLevels|limit=2}}<br /> <br /> = HOWTO =<br /> <br /> The [https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=28656 original idea came from the community].<br /> <br /> To make this work we need to:<br /> <br /> * (DONE) Create a list of the Top 20 Domains<br /> * [[Help:Editing|Help edit this wiki]] (its open for you to help with!)<br /> * Create sources per domain where to pull from.<br /> * Develop leaders per domain<br /> * Get at least 5 papers per domain<br /> ** Think that another paper is more important than the 5 already listed? [[Special:AddData/Summary|Summarize it]] and add it to the list!<br /> <br /> = Additional Resources =<br /> <br /> * [http://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/1168/what-papers-should-everyone-read What papers should everyone read?] - Theoretical Computer Science<br /> <br /> * [http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/10/09/1065676090723.html The five most cited papers]<br /> <br /> * [http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/stats/articles Most Cited Computer Science Articles]<br /> <br /> * [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_important_publications_in_computer_science List of important publications in computer science]<br /> <br /> * [http://in-cites.com/nobel/index.html The 100 Most-Cited Scientists]<br /> <br /> * [http://isihighlycited.com/ ISIHighlyCited.com]<br /> <br /> * [http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/story.asp?storyCode=405956&amp;sectioncode=26 Most cited authors of books in the humanities, 2007]<br /> <br /> * [http://archive.sciencewatch.com/sept-oct2003/sw_sept-oct2003_page2.htm Most-Cited Researchers, 1983-2002]<br /> <br /> * [http://repec.org/ Research Papers in Economics]<br /> <br /> * [http://www.harzing.com/pp_gs.htm Google Scholar - a new data source for citation analysis]<br /> <br /> * [http://wokinfo.com/products_tools/analytical/jcr/ Journal Citation Reports]<br /> <br /> * [http://www.librijournal.org/pdf/2005-4pp170-180.pdf Google Scholar: The New Generation of Citation Indexes]<br /> <br /> * [http://www.librijournal.org/ International Journal of Libraries and Information Services]<br /> <br /> = Collaboration and Communication =<br /> <br /> ''Please join us in spreading the news about this drive, and join us in chat as well!''<br /> <br /> * Public Social Networks<br /> * [[AcaWiki:Communications|Our Communication Channels]]<br /> <br /> = Top 100 Papers =<br /> <br /> == Anthropology ==<br /> <br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Arts and Literature ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> * Username: Spanther<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> =====[[Death of the author]]=====<br /> =====[[What is an author?]]=====<br /> =====[[Why conceptual writing? Why now?]]=====<br /> =====[[The fate of echo]]=====<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Astronomy ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Biology ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Business ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Chemistry ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Clinical Research ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Computer Science ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Stack Exchange: [http://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/1168/what-papers-should-everyone-read What papers should everyone read?]<br /> ** NB: User contributions on Stack Exchange are licensed under [http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/ cc-wiki] with [http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2009/06/attribution-required/ attribution required]<br /> * Turing Award winners [http://twitter.com/RandomlyWalking/status/82385732467032064 (WP)], including papers they've written and the [http://www.informatik.uni-trier.de/~ley/db/journals/cacm/turing.html Turing Award lectures]<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> =====A mathematical theory of communication=====<br /> <br /> &quot;[http://guohanwei.51.net/code/A%20Mathematical%20Theory%20of%20Communication.pdf A mathematical theory of communication]&quot; by Claude Shannon, classics of information theory. Very readable. ([http://cm.bell-labs.com/cm/ms/what/shannonday/shannon1948.pdf Alternative link].)<br /> <br /> cc-by-sa [http://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/1168/what-papers-should-everyone-read/1172#1172 attribution]<br /> <br /> ===== On Computable Numbers, with an Application to the Entscheidungsproblem =====<br /> <br /> The 1936 paper that arguably started computer science:<br /> <br /> Alan Turing, &quot;[http://scholar.google.com/scholar?cluster=16882511564349146333 On Computable Numbers, with an Application to the Entscheidungsproblem]&quot;, Proceedings of the London Mathematical Society s2-42, 230–265, 1937. [http://dx.doi.org/10.1112/plms/s2-42.1.230 doi: 10.1112/plms/s2-42.1.230]<br /> <br /> In just 36 pages, Turing formulates (but does not name) the Turing Machine, recasts Gödel's famous First Incompleteness Theorem in terms of computation, describes the concept of universality, and in the appendix shows that computability by Turing machines is equivalent to computability by λ-definable functions (as studied by Church and Kleene).<br /> <br /> cc-by-sa [http://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/1168/what-papers-should-everyone-read/1170#1170 attribution]<br /> <br /> ===== Can Programming Be Liberated from the von Neumann Style? =====<br /> <br /> &quot;[http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.72.2622&amp;rep=rep1&amp;type=pdf Can Programming Be Liberated from the von Neumann Style? A Functional Style and Its Algebra of Programs]&quot; by John Backus. This is the 1977 ACM Turing Award Lecture in which Backus introduces functional programming to the world. ACM honored Backus with this award for his seminal work on FORTRAN and for being the B in BNF notation used for describing programming language syntax. I found this work to be really inspiring. It caused me to look at computers and programming languages in a whole new way.<br /> <br /> It also represents the kind of paper I wish there were more of. It exposes the inspiration and thought processing behind a nest of ideas without the rigorous but limiting tone of a research paper. It is a shame that researchers have to wait for an opportunity like the ACM Turing Award to be able to express themselves in this mode. Of course, few researchers can write like John Backus. This papers clarity of vision amazes me.<br /> <br /> cc-by-sa [http://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/1168/what-papers-should-everyone-read/6785#6785 attribution] (comments from Paul Topping)<br /> <br /> == Economics ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Education ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> ** [[User:Viovio]]<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> =====[[Crisis in the humanities]]=====<br /> * Summarized! :)<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Engineering ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Geosciences ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Health ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Mathematics ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * [http://mathoverflow.net/questions/2144 mathoverflow: A single paper everyone should read?]<br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> ===== The Yang-Mills Equations over Riemann Surfaces ===== <br /> The Yang-Mills Equations over Riemann Surfaces<br /> Author(s): M. F. Atiyah and R. Bott Source: Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series A, Mathematical and Physical Sciences, Vol. 308, No. 1505 (Mar. 17, 1983), pp. 523-615 Published by: The Royal Society [http://www.jstor.org/stable/37156 copy from JSTOR} [http://dx.doi.org/10.1098/rsta.1983.0017 find by DOI]<br /> : One professor called it &quot;the basis for truly 21st century mathematics.&quot; It is also reportedly accessible by beginning graduate students with some exposure to differential geometry and suitable for independent study or as a reading course. It is a 93 page paper and develops a lot of fundamental constructions and ideas from scratch. Here is [http://www.ams.org/mathscinet-getitem?mr=702806 Martin Guest's review on MathSciNet]. -Justin Kerry at [http://mathoverflow.net/questions/2144/a-single-paper-everyone-should-read/15347#15347 cc-by-sa attribution]<br /> : For about 5 years I carried my copy with me everywhere I went, in an increasingly decrepit 3-ring binder weighed down by page after page of my own notes and explanations. One day, at a conference, a dispute arose over whether the main result of the paper held with integral coefficients or required one to work over the rationals. In the flash of an eye, four or five of us pulled out our copies and opened to the relevant page. Luckily, I was right: integral coefficients. The first time I left home without the paper, it felt like a rite of passage. Or at least that's the way I remember it. – Dan Ramras at [http://mathoverflow.net/questions/2144/a-single-paper-everyone-should-read/15347#15347 cc-by-sa attribution]<br /> <br /> ===== On formally undecidable propositions of Principia Mathematica and related systems =====<br /> Kurt Gödel's [http://www.csee.wvu.edu/~xinl/library/papers/math/Godel.pdf On formally undecidable propositions of Principia Mathematica and related systems]. See [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_Formally_Undecidable_Propositions_of_Principia_Mathematica_and_Related_Systems its Wikipedia article]<br /> <br /> cc-by-sa [http://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/1168/what-papers-should-everyone-read/2218#2218 attribution]<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Medicine ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Neuroscience ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Philosophy ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> =====[[The importance of Bruno Latour for philosophy]]=====<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Physics ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> * Posting a question at [http://physicsoverflow.com/ Physics Overflow] might yield some interesting responses<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> =====The Unreasonable Effectiveness of Mathematics in the Natural Sciences=====<br /> [http://www.ipod.org.uk/reality/reality_wigner.pdf The Unreasonable Effectiveness of Mathematics in the Natural Sciences by Eugene Wigner]<br /> <br /> [http://mathoverflow.net/questions/2144/a-single-paper-everyone-should-read/43207#43207 cc-by-sa attribution]<br /> <br /> =====Quantum Mechanical Computers=====<br /> <br /> [http://www.springerlink.com/content/p1x27746x51x52mm/ Quantum Mechanical Computers (PDF) by Richard Feynman].<br /> <br /> :He introduces the idea of quantum computation, describes quantum circuits, explains how classical circuits can be simulated by quantum circuits, and shows how quantum circuits can compute functions without lots of garbage qubits (using uncomputation).<br /> <br /> :He then shows how any classical circuit can be encoded into a time-independent Hamiltonian! His proof goes through for quantum circuits too, therefore showing that time evolving Hamiltonians is BQP-hard! His Hamiltonian construction is also used in the proof of the quantum version of the Cook-Levin theorem, proved by Kitaev, which shows that k-local Hamiltonian is QMA-complete. cc-by-sa [http://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/1168/what-papers-should-everyone-read/1177#1177 attribution]<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Psychology ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * [http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1698090 &quot;Why Do Humans Reason? Arguments for an Argumentative Theory,&quot;] by Hugo Mercier and Dan Sperber, Behavioral and Brain Sciences, Vol. 34, No. 2, pp. 57-74, 2011<br /> : Jonathan Haidt [http://edge.org/conversation/the-argumentative-theory said] &quot;so important that the abstracts... should be posted in psychology departments all over the country.&quot; and that “the article is one of my favorite papers of the last ten years. I believe that they have solved one of the most important and longstanding puzzles in psychology: why are we so good at reasoning in some cases, but so hopelessly biased in others?<br /> <br /> =====[[The mirror stage as formative of the function of the I as revealed in psychoanalytic experience]]=====<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Sociology ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Sociology Papers ====<br /> Sociology is a big field with many branches (e.g. network research, health communication, media effects, organizational communication, classical sociology, etc.). Perhaps it would be better to make top 5's for each?<br /> <br /> * Bowker, G. C., &amp; Star, S. L. (1999). [[Sorting things out: Classification and its consequences]]. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. <br /> * Granovetter, M. (1983). &quot;[[The strength of weak ties: A network theory revisited]]&quot;. Sociological Theory 1: 201–233. doi:[http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/202051 10.2307/202051]. JSTOR 202051.<br /> * Watts, D. J. (2004). [[The new science of networks]]. Annual Review of Sociology, 30(1), 243-270. DOI:[http://dx.doi.org/10.1146/annurev.soc.30.020404.104342 10.1146/annurev.soc.30.020404.104342], see also [http://enwp.org/Mark_Granovetter#The_strength_of_weak_ties]<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> <br /> [[Category:Activity]]</div>

Spanther https://acawiki.org/index.php?title=The_mirror_stage_as_formative_of_the_function_of_the_I_as_revealed_in_psychoanalytic_experience&diff=6308 2011-09-11T22:45:54Z

<p>Spanther: Created page with &quot;{{Summary |title=The mirror stage as formative of the function of the I as revealed in psychoanalytic experience |authors=Jacques Lacan |url=http://www.soundandsignifier.com/file...&quot;</p> <hr /> <div>{{Summary<br /> |title=The mirror stage as formative of the function of the I as revealed in psychoanalytic experience<br /> |authors=Jacques Lacan<br /> |url=http://www.soundandsignifier.com/files/Lacan_Mirror_Stage.pdf<br /> |tags=psychology, philosophy, <br /> |summary=Lacan's conception of the mirror stage has been called his most famous and significant contribution to the field of psychoanalysis. It's also essential reading for anyone interested in Lacan due to the prevalence of the mirror stage's concepts found throughout his entire oeuvre. <br /> <br /> This particular rendition of the mirror stage was &quot;delivered at the 16th International Congress of Psychoanalysis, Zürich, July 17, 1949&quot;. It is short in length, but quite dense and difficult. I'll attempt to summarize the mirror stage's main features below.<br /> <br /> Primarily concerned with identity, subjectivity and fantasy, Lacan claims the mirror stage takes place between the ages of six to eighteen months when an infant recognizes its self in connection with the image of the specular self. The result is a fantasized, fictional self that is unified and made whole via the image in the mirror, or “the transformation that takes place in the subject when he assumes an image.”<br /> <br /> Due to the self and the specular self not being identical, there is a discontinuity between the two that is psychically alienating. This gap or lack of a unified sense of self, Lacan argues, is where desire stems from—a desire to become whole again. The mirror stage in this sense paradoxically contributes to the “decentering” and unification of the subject through a continuous process of repetition. The following sentence sums this idea up best:<br /> <br /> “The mirror stage is a drama whose internal thrust is precipitated from insufficiency to anticipation—and which manufacturse fo the subject, caught up in the lure of spatial identification, the succession of phantasies that extends from a fragmented body-image to a form of its totality that I shall call orthopaedic—and, lastly, to the assumption of the armour of an alienating identity, which will mark with its rigid structure the subject’s entire mental development.”<br /> <br /> It’s also important to note that Lacan’s notion of the mirror stage shares affinities with Freud’s conception of identification and narcissism—the latter contributing to the formation of the ego. <br /> |relevance=See also [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mirror_stage]<br /> |journal=First articlie from Ecrits: A Selection<br /> |pub_date=1966<br /> |subject=Psychology<br /> }}</div>

Spanther https://acawiki.org/index.php?title=AcaWiki:Top_100_Papers&diff=6220 2011-09-06T04:58:53Z

<p>Spanther: /* The importance of bruno latour */</p> <hr /> <div>We are driving towards gathering summaries of the Top 100 academic papers in the world. This is a large effort to increase the number of our papers, get more students, more researchers, and academics to know about the project and share their specific knowledge. We need your specific expertise to make this project sucessful. <br /> <br /> {{RightTOCLevels|limit=2}}<br /> <br /> = HOWTO =<br /> <br /> The [https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=28656 original idea came from the community].<br /> <br /> To make this work we need to:<br /> <br /> * (DONE) Create a list of the Top 20 Domains<br /> * [[Help:Editing|Help edit this wiki]] (its open for you to help with!)<br /> * Create sources per domain where to pull from.<br /> * Develop leaders per domain<br /> * Get at least 5 papers per domain<br /> ** Think that another paper is more important than the 5 already listed? [[Special:AddData/Summary|Summarize it]] and add it to the list!<br /> <br /> = Additional Resources =<br /> <br /> * [http://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/1168/what-papers-should-everyone-read What papers should everyone read?] - Theoretical Computer Science<br /> <br /> * [http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/10/09/1065676090723.html The five most cited papers]<br /> <br /> * [http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/stats/articles Most Cited Computer Science Articles]<br /> <br /> * [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_important_publications_in_computer_science List of important publications in computer science]<br /> <br /> * [http://in-cites.com/nobel/index.html The 100 Most-Cited Scientists]<br /> <br /> * [http://isihighlycited.com/ ISIHighlyCited.com]<br /> <br /> * [http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/story.asp?storyCode=405956&amp;sectioncode=26 Most cited authors of books in the humanities, 2007]<br /> <br /> * [http://archive.sciencewatch.com/sept-oct2003/sw_sept-oct2003_page2.htm Most-Cited Researchers, 1983-2002]<br /> <br /> * [http://repec.org/ Research Papers in Economics]<br /> <br /> * [http://www.harzing.com/pp_gs.htm Google Scholar - a new data source for citation analysis]<br /> <br /> * [http://wokinfo.com/products_tools/analytical/jcr/ Journal Citation Reports]<br /> <br /> * [http://www.librijournal.org/pdf/2005-4pp170-180.pdf Google Scholar: The New Generation of Citation Indexes]<br /> <br /> * [http://www.librijournal.org/ International Journal of Libraries and Information Services]<br /> <br /> = Collaboration and Communication =<br /> <br /> ''Please join us in spreading the news about this drive, and join us in chat as well!''<br /> <br /> * Public Social Networks<br /> * [[AcaWiki:Communications|Our Communication Channels]]<br /> <br /> = Top 100 Papers =<br /> <br /> == Anthropology ==<br /> <br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Arts and Literature ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> * Username: Spanther<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> =====[[Death of the author]]=====<br /> =====[[What is an author?]]=====<br /> =====[[Why conceptual writing? Why now?]]=====<br /> =====[[The fate of echo]]=====<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Astronomy ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Biology ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Business ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Chemistry ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Clinical Research ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Computer Science ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Stack Exchange: [http://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/1168/what-papers-should-everyone-read What papers should everyone read?]<br /> ** NB: User contributions on Stack Exchange are licensed under [http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/ cc-wiki] with [http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2009/06/attribution-required/ attribution required]<br /> * Turing Award winners [http://twitter.com/RandomlyWalking/status/82385732467032064 (WP)], including papers they've written and the [http://www.informatik.uni-trier.de/~ley/db/journals/cacm/turing.html Turing Award lectures]<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> =====A mathematical theory of communication=====<br /> <br /> &quot;[http://guohanwei.51.net/code/A%20Mathematical%20Theory%20of%20Communication.pdf A mathematical theory of communication]&quot; by Claude Shannon, classics of information theory. Very readable. ([http://cm.bell-labs.com/cm/ms/what/shannonday/shannon1948.pdf Alternative link].)<br /> <br /> cc-by-sa [http://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/1168/what-papers-should-everyone-read/1172#1172 attribution]<br /> <br /> ===== On Computable Numbers, with an Application to the Entscheidungsproblem =====<br /> <br /> The 1936 paper that arguably started computer science:<br /> <br /> Alan Turing, &quot;[http://scholar.google.com/scholar?cluster=16882511564349146333 On Computable Numbers, with an Application to the Entscheidungsproblem]&quot;, Proceedings of the London Mathematical Society s2-42, 230–265, 1937. [http://dx.doi.org/10.1112/plms/s2-42.1.230 doi: 10.1112/plms/s2-42.1.230]<br /> <br /> In just 36 pages, Turing formulates (but does not name) the Turing Machine, recasts Gödel's famous First Incompleteness Theorem in terms of computation, describes the concept of universality, and in the appendix shows that computability by Turing machines is equivalent to computability by λ-definable functions (as studied by Church and Kleene).<br /> <br /> cc-by-sa [http://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/1168/what-papers-should-everyone-read/1170#1170 attribution]<br /> <br /> ===== Can Programming Be Liberated from the von Neumann Style? =====<br /> <br /> &quot;[http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.72.2622&amp;rep=rep1&amp;type=pdf Can Programming Be Liberated from the von Neumann Style? A Functional Style and Its Algebra of Programs]&quot; by John Backus. This is the 1977 ACM Turing Award Lecture in which Backus introduces functional programming to the world. ACM honored Backus with this award for his seminal work on FORTRAN and for being the B in BNF notation used for describing programming language syntax. I found this work to be really inspiring. It caused me to look at computers and programming languages in a whole new way.<br /> <br /> It also represents the kind of paper I wish there were more of. It exposes the inspiration and thought processing behind a nest of ideas without the rigorous but limiting tone of a research paper. It is a shame that researchers have to wait for an opportunity like the ACM Turing Award to be able to express themselves in this mode. Of course, few researchers can write like John Backus. This papers clarity of vision amazes me.<br /> <br /> cc-by-sa [http://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/1168/what-papers-should-everyone-read/6785#6785 attribution] (comments from Paul Topping)<br /> <br /> == Economics ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Education ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> ** [[User:Viovio]]<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> =====[[Crisis in the humanities]]=====<br /> * Summarized! :)<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Engineering ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Geosciences ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Health ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Mathematics ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * [http://mathoverflow.net/questions/2144 mathoverflow: A single paper everyone should read?]<br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> ===== The Yang-Mills Equations over Riemann Surfaces ===== <br /> The Yang-Mills Equations over Riemann Surfaces<br /> Author(s): M. F. Atiyah and R. Bott Source: Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series A, Mathematical and Physical Sciences, Vol. 308, No. 1505 (Mar. 17, 1983), pp. 523-615 Published by: The Royal Society [http://www.jstor.org/stable/37156 copy from JSTOR} [http://dx.doi.org/10.1098/rsta.1983.0017 find by DOI]<br /> : One professor called it &quot;the basis for truly 21st century mathematics.&quot; It is also reportedly accessible by beginning graduate students with some exposure to differential geometry and suitable for independent study or as a reading course. It is a 93 page paper and develops a lot of fundamental constructions and ideas from scratch. Here is [http://www.ams.org/mathscinet-getitem?mr=702806 Martin Guest's review on MathSciNet]. -Justin Kerry at [http://mathoverflow.net/questions/2144/a-single-paper-everyone-should-read/15347#15347 cc-by-sa attribution]<br /> : For about 5 years I carried my copy with me everywhere I went, in an increasingly decrepit 3-ring binder weighed down by page after page of my own notes and explanations. One day, at a conference, a dispute arose over whether the main result of the paper held with integral coefficients or required one to work over the rationals. In the flash of an eye, four or five of us pulled out our copies and opened to the relevant page. Luckily, I was right: integral coefficients. The first time I left home without the paper, it felt like a rite of passage. Or at least that's the way I remember it. – Dan Ramras at [http://mathoverflow.net/questions/2144/a-single-paper-everyone-should-read/15347#15347 cc-by-sa attribution]<br /> <br /> ===== On formally undecidable propositions of Principia Mathematica and related systems =====<br /> Kurt Gödel's [http://www.csee.wvu.edu/~xinl/library/papers/math/Godel.pdf On formally undecidable propositions of Principia Mathematica and related systems]. See [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_Formally_Undecidable_Propositions_of_Principia_Mathematica_and_Related_Systems its Wikipedia article]<br /> <br /> cc-by-sa [http://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/1168/what-papers-should-everyone-read/2218#2218 attribution]<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Medicine ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Neuroscience ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Philosophy ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> =====[[The importance of bruno latour for philosophy]]=====<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Physics ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> * Posting a question at [http://physicsoverflow.com/ Physics Overflow] might yield some interesting responses<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> =====The Unreasonable Effectiveness of Mathematics in the Natural Sciences=====<br /> [http://www.ipod.org.uk/reality/reality_wigner.pdf The Unreasonable Effectiveness of Mathematics in the Natural Sciences by Eugene Wigner]<br /> <br /> [http://mathoverflow.net/questions/2144/a-single-paper-everyone-should-read/43207#43207 cc-by-sa attribution]<br /> <br /> =====Quantum Mechanical Computers=====<br /> <br /> [http://www.springerlink.com/content/p1x27746x51x52mm/ Quantum Mechanical Computers (PDF) by Richard Feynman].<br /> <br /> :He introduces the idea of quantum computation, describes quantum circuits, explains how classical circuits can be simulated by quantum circuits, and shows how quantum circuits can compute functions without lots of garbage qubits (using uncomputation).<br /> <br /> :He then shows how any classical circuit can be encoded into a time-independent Hamiltonian! His proof goes through for quantum circuits too, therefore showing that time evolving Hamiltonians is BQP-hard! His Hamiltonian construction is also used in the proof of the quantum version of the Cook-Levin theorem, proved by Kitaev, which shows that k-local Hamiltonian is QMA-complete. cc-by-sa [http://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/1168/what-papers-should-everyone-read/1177#1177 attribution]<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Psychology ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * [http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1698090 &quot;Why Do Humans Reason? Arguments for an Argumentative Theory,&quot;] by Hugo Mercier and Dan Sperber, Behavioral and Brain Sciences, Vol. 34, No. 2, pp. 57-74, 2011<br /> : Jonathan Haidt [http://edge.org/conversation/the-argumentative-theory said] &quot;so important that the abstracts... should be posted in psychology departments all over the country.&quot; and that “the article is one of my favorite papers of the last ten years. I believe that they have solved one of the most important and longstanding puzzles in psychology: why are we so good at reasoning in some cases, but so hopelessly biased in others?<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Sociology ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Sociology Papers ====<br /> Sociology is a big field with many branches (e.g. network research, health communication, media effects, organizational communication, classical sociology, etc.). Perhaps it would be better to make top 5's for each?<br /> <br /> * Bowker, G. C., &amp; Star, S. L. (1999). [[Sorting things out: Classification and its consequences]]. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. <br /> * Granovetter, M. (1983). &quot;[[The strength of weak ties: A network theory revisited]]&quot;. Sociological Theory 1: 201–233. doi:[http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/202051 10.2307/202051]. JSTOR 202051.<br /> * Watts, D. J. (2004). [[The new science of networks]]. Annual Review of Sociology, 30(1), 243-270. DOI:[http://dx.doi.org/10.1146/annurev.soc.30.020404.104342 10.1146/annurev.soc.30.020404.104342], see also [http://enwp.org/Mark_Granovetter#The_strength_of_weak_ties]<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> <br /> [[Category:Activity]]</div>

Spanther https://acawiki.org/index.php?title=AcaWiki:Top_100_Papers&diff=6219 2011-09-06T04:57:54Z

<p>Spanther: /* Papers */</p> <hr /> <div>We are driving towards gathering summaries of the Top 100 academic papers in the world. This is a large effort to increase the number of our papers, get more students, more researchers, and academics to know about the project and share their specific knowledge. We need your specific expertise to make this project sucessful. <br /> <br /> {{RightTOCLevels|limit=2}}<br /> <br /> = HOWTO =<br /> <br /> The [https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=28656 original idea came from the community].<br /> <br /> To make this work we need to:<br /> <br /> * (DONE) Create a list of the Top 20 Domains<br /> * [[Help:Editing|Help edit this wiki]] (its open for you to help with!)<br /> * Create sources per domain where to pull from.<br /> * Develop leaders per domain<br /> * Get at least 5 papers per domain<br /> ** Think that another paper is more important than the 5 already listed? [[Special:AddData/Summary|Summarize it]] and add it to the list!<br /> <br /> = Additional Resources =<br /> <br /> * [http://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/1168/what-papers-should-everyone-read What papers should everyone read?] - Theoretical Computer Science<br /> <br /> * [http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/10/09/1065676090723.html The five most cited papers]<br /> <br /> * [http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/stats/articles Most Cited Computer Science Articles]<br /> <br /> * [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_important_publications_in_computer_science List of important publications in computer science]<br /> <br /> * [http://in-cites.com/nobel/index.html The 100 Most-Cited Scientists]<br /> <br /> * [http://isihighlycited.com/ ISIHighlyCited.com]<br /> <br /> * [http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/story.asp?storyCode=405956&amp;sectioncode=26 Most cited authors of books in the humanities, 2007]<br /> <br /> * [http://archive.sciencewatch.com/sept-oct2003/sw_sept-oct2003_page2.htm Most-Cited Researchers, 1983-2002]<br /> <br /> * [http://repec.org/ Research Papers in Economics]<br /> <br /> * [http://www.harzing.com/pp_gs.htm Google Scholar - a new data source for citation analysis]<br /> <br /> * [http://wokinfo.com/products_tools/analytical/jcr/ Journal Citation Reports]<br /> <br /> * [http://www.librijournal.org/pdf/2005-4pp170-180.pdf Google Scholar: The New Generation of Citation Indexes]<br /> <br /> * [http://www.librijournal.org/ International Journal of Libraries and Information Services]<br /> <br /> = Collaboration and Communication =<br /> <br /> ''Please join us in spreading the news about this drive, and join us in chat as well!''<br /> <br /> * Public Social Networks<br /> * [[AcaWiki:Communications|Our Communication Channels]]<br /> <br /> = Top 100 Papers =<br /> <br /> == Anthropology ==<br /> <br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Arts and Literature ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> * Username: Spanther<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> =====[[Death of the author]]=====<br /> =====[[What is an author?]]=====<br /> =====[[Why conceptual writing? Why now?]]=====<br /> =====[[The fate of echo]]=====<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Astronomy ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Biology ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Business ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Chemistry ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Clinical Research ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Computer Science ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Stack Exchange: [http://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/1168/what-papers-should-everyone-read What papers should everyone read?]<br /> ** NB: User contributions on Stack Exchange are licensed under [http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/ cc-wiki] with [http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2009/06/attribution-required/ attribution required]<br /> * Turing Award winners [http://twitter.com/RandomlyWalking/status/82385732467032064 (WP)], including papers they've written and the [http://www.informatik.uni-trier.de/~ley/db/journals/cacm/turing.html Turing Award lectures]<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> =====A mathematical theory of communication=====<br /> <br /> &quot;[http://guohanwei.51.net/code/A%20Mathematical%20Theory%20of%20Communication.pdf A mathematical theory of communication]&quot; by Claude Shannon, classics of information theory. Very readable. ([http://cm.bell-labs.com/cm/ms/what/shannonday/shannon1948.pdf Alternative link].)<br /> <br /> cc-by-sa [http://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/1168/what-papers-should-everyone-read/1172#1172 attribution]<br /> <br /> ===== On Computable Numbers, with an Application to the Entscheidungsproblem =====<br /> <br /> The 1936 paper that arguably started computer science:<br /> <br /> Alan Turing, &quot;[http://scholar.google.com/scholar?cluster=16882511564349146333 On Computable Numbers, with an Application to the Entscheidungsproblem]&quot;, Proceedings of the London Mathematical Society s2-42, 230–265, 1937. [http://dx.doi.org/10.1112/plms/s2-42.1.230 doi: 10.1112/plms/s2-42.1.230]<br /> <br /> In just 36 pages, Turing formulates (but does not name) the Turing Machine, recasts Gödel's famous First Incompleteness Theorem in terms of computation, describes the concept of universality, and in the appendix shows that computability by Turing machines is equivalent to computability by λ-definable functions (as studied by Church and Kleene).<br /> <br /> cc-by-sa [http://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/1168/what-papers-should-everyone-read/1170#1170 attribution]<br /> <br /> ===== Can Programming Be Liberated from the von Neumann Style? =====<br /> <br /> &quot;[http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.72.2622&amp;rep=rep1&amp;type=pdf Can Programming Be Liberated from the von Neumann Style? A Functional Style and Its Algebra of Programs]&quot; by John Backus. This is the 1977 ACM Turing Award Lecture in which Backus introduces functional programming to the world. ACM honored Backus with this award for his seminal work on FORTRAN and for being the B in BNF notation used for describing programming language syntax. I found this work to be really inspiring. It caused me to look at computers and programming languages in a whole new way.<br /> <br /> It also represents the kind of paper I wish there were more of. It exposes the inspiration and thought processing behind a nest of ideas without the rigorous but limiting tone of a research paper. It is a shame that researchers have to wait for an opportunity like the ACM Turing Award to be able to express themselves in this mode. Of course, few researchers can write like John Backus. This papers clarity of vision amazes me.<br /> <br /> cc-by-sa [http://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/1168/what-papers-should-everyone-read/6785#6785 attribution] (comments from Paul Topping)<br /> <br /> == Economics ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Education ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> ** [[User:Viovio]]<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> =====[[Crisis in the humanities]]=====<br /> * Summarized! :)<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Engineering ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Geosciences ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Health ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Mathematics ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * [http://mathoverflow.net/questions/2144 mathoverflow: A single paper everyone should read?]<br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> ===== The Yang-Mills Equations over Riemann Surfaces ===== <br /> The Yang-Mills Equations over Riemann Surfaces<br /> Author(s): M. F. Atiyah and R. Bott Source: Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series A, Mathematical and Physical Sciences, Vol. 308, No. 1505 (Mar. 17, 1983), pp. 523-615 Published by: The Royal Society [http://www.jstor.org/stable/37156 copy from JSTOR} [http://dx.doi.org/10.1098/rsta.1983.0017 find by DOI]<br /> : One professor called it &quot;the basis for truly 21st century mathematics.&quot; It is also reportedly accessible by beginning graduate students with some exposure to differential geometry and suitable for independent study or as a reading course. It is a 93 page paper and develops a lot of fundamental constructions and ideas from scratch. Here is [http://www.ams.org/mathscinet-getitem?mr=702806 Martin Guest's review on MathSciNet]. -Justin Kerry at [http://mathoverflow.net/questions/2144/a-single-paper-everyone-should-read/15347#15347 cc-by-sa attribution]<br /> : For about 5 years I carried my copy with me everywhere I went, in an increasingly decrepit 3-ring binder weighed down by page after page of my own notes and explanations. One day, at a conference, a dispute arose over whether the main result of the paper held with integral coefficients or required one to work over the rationals. In the flash of an eye, four or five of us pulled out our copies and opened to the relevant page. Luckily, I was right: integral coefficients. The first time I left home without the paper, it felt like a rite of passage. Or at least that's the way I remember it. – Dan Ramras at [http://mathoverflow.net/questions/2144/a-single-paper-everyone-should-read/15347#15347 cc-by-sa attribution]<br /> <br /> ===== On formally undecidable propositions of Principia Mathematica and related systems =====<br /> Kurt Gödel's [http://www.csee.wvu.edu/~xinl/library/papers/math/Godel.pdf On formally undecidable propositions of Principia Mathematica and related systems]. See [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_Formally_Undecidable_Propositions_of_Principia_Mathematica_and_Related_Systems its Wikipedia article]<br /> <br /> cc-by-sa [http://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/1168/what-papers-should-everyone-read/2218#2218 attribution]<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Medicine ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Neuroscience ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Philosophy ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> =====[[The importance of bruno latour]]=====<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Physics ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> * Posting a question at [http://physicsoverflow.com/ Physics Overflow] might yield some interesting responses<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> =====The Unreasonable Effectiveness of Mathematics in the Natural Sciences=====<br /> [http://www.ipod.org.uk/reality/reality_wigner.pdf The Unreasonable Effectiveness of Mathematics in the Natural Sciences by Eugene Wigner]<br /> <br /> [http://mathoverflow.net/questions/2144/a-single-paper-everyone-should-read/43207#43207 cc-by-sa attribution]<br /> <br /> =====Quantum Mechanical Computers=====<br /> <br /> [http://www.springerlink.com/content/p1x27746x51x52mm/ Quantum Mechanical Computers (PDF) by Richard Feynman].<br /> <br /> :He introduces the idea of quantum computation, describes quantum circuits, explains how classical circuits can be simulated by quantum circuits, and shows how quantum circuits can compute functions without lots of garbage qubits (using uncomputation).<br /> <br /> :He then shows how any classical circuit can be encoded into a time-independent Hamiltonian! His proof goes through for quantum circuits too, therefore showing that time evolving Hamiltonians is BQP-hard! His Hamiltonian construction is also used in the proof of the quantum version of the Cook-Levin theorem, proved by Kitaev, which shows that k-local Hamiltonian is QMA-complete. cc-by-sa [http://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/1168/what-papers-should-everyone-read/1177#1177 attribution]<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Psychology ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * [http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1698090 &quot;Why Do Humans Reason? Arguments for an Argumentative Theory,&quot;] by Hugo Mercier and Dan Sperber, Behavioral and Brain Sciences, Vol. 34, No. 2, pp. 57-74, 2011<br /> : Jonathan Haidt [http://edge.org/conversation/the-argumentative-theory said] &quot;so important that the abstracts... should be posted in psychology departments all over the country.&quot; and that “the article is one of my favorite papers of the last ten years. I believe that they have solved one of the most important and longstanding puzzles in psychology: why are we so good at reasoning in some cases, but so hopelessly biased in others?<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Sociology ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Sociology Papers ====<br /> Sociology is a big field with many branches (e.g. network research, health communication, media effects, organizational communication, classical sociology, etc.). Perhaps it would be better to make top 5's for each?<br /> <br /> * Bowker, G. C., &amp; Star, S. L. (1999). [[Sorting things out: Classification and its consequences]]. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. <br /> * Granovetter, M. (1983). &quot;[[The strength of weak ties: A network theory revisited]]&quot;. Sociological Theory 1: 201–233. doi:[http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/202051 10.2307/202051]. JSTOR 202051.<br /> * Watts, D. J. (2004). [[The new science of networks]]. Annual Review of Sociology, 30(1), 243-270. DOI:[http://dx.doi.org/10.1146/annurev.soc.30.020404.104342 10.1146/annurev.soc.30.020404.104342], see also [http://enwp.org/Mark_Granovetter#The_strength_of_weak_ties]<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> <br /> [[Category:Activity]]</div>

Spanther https://acawiki.org/index.php?title=The_importance_of_Bruno_Latour_for_philosophy&diff=6218 2011-09-06T04:56:20Z

<p>Spanther: </p> <hr /> <div>{{Summary<br /> |title=The importance of bruno latour for philosophy<br /> |authors=Graham Harman<br /> |url=http://epress.lib.uts.edu.au/ojs/index.php/csrj/article/viewFile/2153/2318<br /> |tags=philosophy<br /> |summary=In this article Graham Harman, like the title suggests, stresses the importance of Bruno Latour in the field of philosophy. Latour, Harman agues, has been widely accepted and published in several other disciplines (anthropology, science, fine arts), but has had strangely little impact in the world of philosophy. Given that Latour is a &quot;full-blown philosopher,&quot; Harman feels this is particularly strange.<br /> <br /> The reason for this lack of implementation, says Harman, &quot;lies in the stale joint consensus of a philosophical world still divided between analytic and continental schools.&quot; <br /> <br /> After lamenting the gap philosophy has incurred by not incorporating Latour during the past couple of decades, Harman introduces Latour and his book &quot;Irreductions&quot;. Some of the main points during this introduction include:<br /> <br /> 1. &quot;Bruno Latour is no Heideggerian.&quot; I.e., Latour is not a continental philosopher. He's democratic in the sense that that &quot;he makes no distinction even between different ranks and castes of entities, and would study the production of cell phones just as respectfully as ancient tribal handiwork.&quot; &lt;br&gt;<br /> 2. Latour isn't opposed to realism or power, but is opposed to reductionism—when complexities are reduced to a single, privileged subject. Or, in other words, &quot;'nothing is more complex, multiple, real, palpable, or interesting than anything else'&quot; (Harman quoting Latour). &lt;br&gt;<br /> 3. &quot;...[E]verything that exists can be regarded as an actor or actant.&quot; What this means is that everything, &quot;animate and inanimate, human and nonhuman, or subject and object&quot; is positioned on the same ontological threshold.&lt;br&gt; <br /> 4. Actors or actants operate in networks and never alone. &quot;...[I]t is only the interactions between actants that carve up reality into all its individual districts.&quot;<br /> <br /> Once these main tenets are described, Harman delves into a series of more nuanced explanations regarding their composite complexities and formations, including sections on &quot;Translation&quot; and &quot;Associations&quot; where we learn that &quot;no actant is inherently strong or weak&quot;, but instead depends on &quot;allies&quot; or other actants to gain strength. Or, as Harman reiterates again and again in the article: &quot;An actant is nothing without networks; with networks, it is all.&quot;<br /> <br /> The last section titled &quot;A New Occasionalism&quot; goes into great detail relating Latour's philosophy with previous philosophical traditions it shares affinities with and is diametrically opposed to. This section is the most dense, but Harman does a great job of maintaining clarity and brevity. He ends the article by heralding Latour for &quot;reviving metaphysics in continental philosophy&quot; and introducing such radical, if ignored, work.<br /> |journal=Cultural Studies Review<br /> |pub_date=2007/03<br /> |subject=Philosophy<br /> }}</div>

Spanther https://acawiki.org/index.php?title=The_importance_of_Bruno_Latour_for_philosophy&diff=6217 2011-09-06T04:55:35Z

<p>Spanther: </p> <hr /> <div>{{Summary<br /> |title=The importance of bruno latour for philosophy<br /> |authors=Graham Harman<br /> |url=http://epress.lib.uts.edu.au/ojs/index.php/csrj/article/viewFile/2153/2318<br /> |tags=philosophy<br /> |summary=In this article Graham Harman, like the title suggests, stresses the importance of Bruno Latour in the field of philosophy. Latour, Harman agues, has been widely accepted and published in several other disciplines (anthropology, science, fine arts), but has had strangely little impact in the world of philosophy. Given that Latour is a &quot;full-blown philosopher,&quot; Harman feels this is particularly strange.<br /> <br /> The reason for this lack of implementation, says Harman, &quot;lies in the stale joint consensus of a philosophical world still divided between analytic and continental schools.&quot; <br /> <br /> After lamenting the gap philosophy has incurred by not incorporating Latour during the past couple of decades, Harman introduces Latour and his book &quot;Irreductions&quot;. Some of the main points during this introduction include:&lt;/br&gt;<br /> <br /> 1. &quot;Bruno Latour is no Heideggerian.&quot; I.e., Latour is not a continental philosopher. He's democratic in the sense that that &quot;he makes no distinction even between different ranks and castes of entities, and would study the production of cell phones just as respectfully as ancient tribal handiwork.&quot; &lt;/br&gt;<br /> 2. Latour isn't opposed to realism or power, but is opposed to reductionism—when complexities are reduced to a single, privileged subject. Or, in other words, &quot;'nothing is more complex, multiple, real, palpable, or interesting than anything else'&quot; (Harman quoting Latour). &lt;/br&gt;<br /> 3. &quot;...[E]verything that exists can be regarded as an actor or actant.&quot; What this means is that everything, &quot;animate and inanimate, human and nonhuman, or subject and object&quot; is positioned on the same ontological threshold.&lt;/br&gt; <br /> 4. Actors or actants operate in networks and never alone. &quot;...[I]t is only the interactions between actants that carve up reality into all its individual districts.&quot;&lt;/br&gt;<br /> <br /> Once these main tenets are described, Harman delves into a series of more nuanced explanations regarding their composite complexities and formations, including sections on &quot;Translation&quot; and &quot;Associations&quot; where we learn that &quot;no actant is inherently strong or weak&quot;, but instead depends on &quot;allies&quot; or other actants to gain strength. Or, as Harman reiterates again and again in the article: &quot;An actant is nothing without networks; with networks, it is all.&quot;<br /> <br /> The last section titled &quot;A New Occasionalism&quot; goes into great detail relating Latour's philosophy with previous philosophical traditions it shares affinities with and is diametrically opposed to. This section is the most dense, but Harman does a great job of maintaining clarity and brevity. He ends the article by heralding Latour for &quot;reviving metaphysics in continental philosophy&quot; and introducing such radical, if ignored, work.<br /> |journal=Cultural Studies Review<br /> |pub_date=2007/03<br /> |subject=Philosophy<br /> }}</div>

Spanther https://acawiki.org/index.php?title=The_importance_of_Bruno_Latour_for_philosophy&diff=6216 2011-09-06T04:53:53Z

<p>Spanther: Created page with &quot;{{Summary |title=The importance of bruno latour for philosophy |authors=Graham Harman |url=http://epress.lib.uts.edu.au/ojs/index.php/csrj/article/viewFile/2153/2318 |tags=philo...&quot;</p> <hr /> <div>{{Summary<br /> |title=The importance of bruno latour for philosophy <br /> |authors=Graham Harman<br /> |url=http://epress.lib.uts.edu.au/ojs/index.php/csrj/article/viewFile/2153/2318<br /> |tags=philosophy, metaphysics<br /> |summary=In this article Graham Harman, like the title suggests, stresses the importance of Bruno Latour in the field of philosophy. Latour, Harman agues, has been widely accepted and published in several other disciplines (anthropology, science, fine arts), but has had strangely little impact in the world of philosophy. Given that Latour is a &quot;full-blown philosopher,&quot; Harman feels this is particularly strange.<br /> <br /> The reason for this lack of implementation, says Harman, &quot;lies in the stale joint consensus of a philosophical world still divided between analytic and continental schools.&quot; <br /> <br /> After lamenting the gap philosophy has incurred by not incorporating Latour during the past couple of decades, Harman introduces Latour and his book &quot;Irreductions&quot;. Some of the main points during this introduction include:<br /> <br /> 1. &quot;Bruno Latour is no Heideggerian.&quot; I.e., Latour is not a continental philosopher. He's democratic in the sense that that &quot;he makes no distinction even between different ranks and castes of entities, and would study the production of cell phones just as respectfully as ancient tribal handiwork.&quot;<br /> 2. Latour isn't opposed to realism or power, but is opposed to reductionism—when complexities are reduced to a single, privileged subject. Or, in other words, &quot;'nothing is more complex, multiple, real, palpable, or interesting than anything else'&quot; (Harman quoting Latour).<br /> 3. &quot;...[E]verything that exists can be regarded as an actor or actant.&quot; What this means is that everything, &quot;animate and inanimate, human and nonhuman, or subject and object&quot; is positioned on the same ontological threshold. <br /> 4. Actors or actants operate in networks and never alone. &quot;...[I]t is only the interactions between actants that carve up reality into all its individual districts.&quot;<br /> <br /> Once these main tenets are described, Harman delves into a series of more nuanced explanations regarding their composite complexities and formations, including sections on &quot;Translation&quot; and &quot;Associations&quot; where we learn that &quot;no actant is inherently strong or weak&quot;, but instead depends on &quot;allies&quot; or other actants to gain strength. Or, as Harman reiterates again and again in the article: &quot;An actant is nothing without networks; with networks, it is all.&quot;<br /> <br /> The last section titled &quot;A New Occasionalism&quot; goes into great detail relating Latour's philosophy with previous philosophical traditions it shares affinities with and is diametrically opposed to. This section is the most dense, but Harman does a great job of maintaining clarity and brevity. He ends the article by heralding Latour for &quot;reviving metaphysics in continental philosophy&quot; and introducing such radical, if ignored, work. <br /> <br /> |journal=Cultural Studies Review<br /> |pub_date=2007/03<br /> |subject=Philosophy<br /> }}</div>

Spanther https://acawiki.org/index.php?title=AcaWiki:Top_100_Papers&diff=6190 2011-09-04T02:56:45Z

<p>Spanther: /* Papers */</p> <hr /> <div>We are driving towards gathering summaries of the Top 100 academic papers in the world. This is a large effort to increase the number of our papers, get more students, more researchers, and academics to know about the project and share their specific knowledge. We need your specific expertise to make this project sucessful. <br /> <br /> {{RightTOCLevels|limit=2}}<br /> <br /> = HOWTO =<br /> <br /> The [https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=28656 original idea came from the community].<br /> <br /> To make this work we need to:<br /> <br /> * (DONE) Create a list of the Top 20 Domains<br /> * [[Help:Editing|Help edit this wiki]] (its open for you to help with!)<br /> * Create sources per domain where to pull from.<br /> * Develop leaders per domain<br /> * Get at least 5 papers per domain<br /> ** Think that another paper is more important than the 5 already listed? [[Special:AddData/Summary|Summarize it]] and add it to the list!<br /> <br /> = Additional Resources =<br /> <br /> * [http://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/1168/what-papers-should-everyone-read What papers should everyone read?] - Theoretical Computer Science<br /> <br /> * [http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/10/09/1065676090723.html The five most cited papers]<br /> <br /> * [http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/stats/articles Most Cited Computer Science Articles]<br /> <br /> * [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_important_publications_in_computer_science List of important publications in computer science]<br /> <br /> * [http://in-cites.com/nobel/index.html The 100 Most-Cited Scientists]<br /> <br /> * [http://isihighlycited.com/ ISIHighlyCited.com]<br /> <br /> * [http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/story.asp?storyCode=405956&amp;sectioncode=26 Most cited authors of books in the humanities, 2007]<br /> <br /> * [http://archive.sciencewatch.com/sept-oct2003/sw_sept-oct2003_page2.htm Most-Cited Researchers, 1983-2002]<br /> <br /> * [http://repec.org/ Research Papers in Economics]<br /> <br /> * [http://www.harzing.com/pp_gs.htm Google Scholar - a new data source for citation analysis]<br /> <br /> * [http://wokinfo.com/products_tools/analytical/jcr/ Journal Citation Reports]<br /> <br /> * [http://www.librijournal.org/pdf/2005-4pp170-180.pdf Google Scholar: The New Generation of Citation Indexes]<br /> <br /> * [http://www.librijournal.org/ International Journal of Libraries and Information Services]<br /> <br /> = Collaboration and Communication =<br /> <br /> ''Please join us in spreading the news about this drive, and join us in chat as well!''<br /> <br /> * Public Social Networks<br /> * [[AcaWiki:Communications|Our Communication Channels]]<br /> <br /> = Top 100 Papers =<br /> <br /> == Anthropology ==<br /> <br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Arts and Literature ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> * Username: Spanther<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> =====[[Death of the author]]=====<br /> =====[[What is an author?]]=====<br /> =====[[Why Conceptual Writing? Why Now?]]=====<br /> =====[[The fate of echo]]=====<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Astronomy ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Biology ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Business ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Chemistry ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Clinical Research ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Computer Science ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Stack Exchange: [http://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/1168/what-papers-should-everyone-read What papers should everyone read?]<br /> ** NB: User contributions on Stack Exchange are licensed under [http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/ cc-wiki] with [http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2009/06/attribution-required/ attribution required]<br /> * Turing Award winners [http://twitter.com/RandomlyWalking/status/82385732467032064 (WP)], including papers they've written and the [http://www.informatik.uni-trier.de/~ley/db/journals/cacm/turing.html Turing Award lectures]<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> =====A mathematical theory of communication=====<br /> <br /> &quot;[http://guohanwei.51.net/code/A%20Mathematical%20Theory%20of%20Communication.pdf A mathematical theory of communication]&quot; by Claude Shannon, classics of information theory. Very readable. ([http://cm.bell-labs.com/cm/ms/what/shannonday/shannon1948.pdf Alternative link].)<br /> <br /> cc-by-sa [http://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/1168/what-papers-should-everyone-read/1172#1172 attribution]<br /> <br /> ===== On Computable Numbers, with an Application to the Entscheidungsproblem =====<br /> <br /> The 1936 paper that arguably started computer science:<br /> <br /> Alan Turing, &quot;[http://scholar.google.com/scholar?cluster=16882511564349146333 On Computable Numbers, with an Application to the Entscheidungsproblem]&quot;, Proceedings of the London Mathematical Society s2-42, 230–265, 1937. [http://dx.doi.org/10.1112/plms/s2-42.1.230 doi: 10.1112/plms/s2-42.1.230]<br /> <br /> In just 36 pages, Turing formulates (but does not name) the Turing Machine, recasts Gödel's famous First Incompleteness Theorem in terms of computation, describes the concept of universality, and in the appendix shows that computability by Turing machines is equivalent to computability by λ-definable functions (as studied by Church and Kleene).<br /> <br /> cc-by-sa [http://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/1168/what-papers-should-everyone-read/1170#1170 attribution]<br /> <br /> ===== Can Programming Be Liberated from the von Neumann Style? =====<br /> <br /> &quot;[http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.72.2622&amp;rep=rep1&amp;type=pdf Can Programming Be Liberated from the von Neumann Style? A Functional Style and Its Algebra of Programs]&quot; by John Backus. This is the 1977 ACM Turing Award Lecture in which Backus introduces functional programming to the world. ACM honored Backus with this award for his seminal work on FORTRAN and for being the B in BNF notation used for describing programming language syntax. I found this work to be really inspiring. It caused me to look at computers and programming languages in a whole new way.<br /> <br /> It also represents the kind of paper I wish there were more of. It exposes the inspiration and thought processing behind a nest of ideas without the rigorous but limiting tone of a research paper. It is a shame that researchers have to wait for an opportunity like the ACM Turing Award to be able to express themselves in this mode. Of course, few researchers can write like John Backus. This papers clarity of vision amazes me.<br /> <br /> cc-by-sa [http://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/1168/what-papers-should-everyone-read/6785#6785 attribution] (comments from Paul Topping)<br /> <br /> == Economics ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Education ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> ** [[User:Viovio]]<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> =====[[Crisis in the humanities]]=====<br /> * Summarized! :)<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Engineering ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Geosciences ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Health ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Mathematics ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * [http://mathoverflow.net/questions/2144 mathoverflow: A single paper everyone should read?]<br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> ===== The Yang-Mills Equations over Riemann Surfaces ===== <br /> The Yang-Mills Equations over Riemann Surfaces<br /> Author(s): M. F. Atiyah and R. Bott Source: Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series A, Mathematical and Physical Sciences, Vol. 308, No. 1505 (Mar. 17, 1983), pp. 523-615 Published by: The Royal Society [http://www.jstor.org/stable/37156 copy from JSTOR} [http://dx.doi.org/10.1098/rsta.1983.0017 find by DOI]<br /> : One professor called it &quot;the basis for truly 21st century mathematics.&quot; It is also reportedly accessible by beginning graduate students with some exposure to differential geometry and suitable for independent study or as a reading course. It is a 93 page paper and develops a lot of fundamental constructions and ideas from scratch. Here is [http://www.ams.org/mathscinet-getitem?mr=702806 Martin Guest's review on MathSciNet]. -Justin Kerry at [http://mathoverflow.net/questions/2144/a-single-paper-everyone-should-read/15347#15347 cc-by-sa attribution]<br /> : For about 5 years I carried my copy with me everywhere I went, in an increasingly decrepit 3-ring binder weighed down by page after page of my own notes and explanations. One day, at a conference, a dispute arose over whether the main result of the paper held with integral coefficients or required one to work over the rationals. In the flash of an eye, four or five of us pulled out our copies and opened to the relevant page. Luckily, I was right: integral coefficients. The first time I left home without the paper, it felt like a rite of passage. Or at least that's the way I remember it. – Dan Ramras at [http://mathoverflow.net/questions/2144/a-single-paper-everyone-should-read/15347#15347 cc-by-sa attribution]<br /> <br /> ===== On formally undecidable propositions of Principia Mathematica and related systems =====<br /> Kurt Gödel's [http://www.csee.wvu.edu/~xinl/library/papers/math/Godel.pdf On formally undecidable propositions of Principia Mathematica and related systems]. See [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_Formally_Undecidable_Propositions_of_Principia_Mathematica_and_Related_Systems its Wikipedia article]<br /> <br /> cc-by-sa [http://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/1168/what-papers-should-everyone-read/2218#2218 attribution]<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Medicine ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Neuroscience ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Philosophy ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Physics ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> * Posting a question at [http://physicsoverflow.com/ Physics Overflow] might yield some interesting responses<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> =====The Unreasonable Effectiveness of Mathematics in the Natural Sciences=====<br /> [http://www.ipod.org.uk/reality/reality_wigner.pdf The Unreasonable Effectiveness of Mathematics in the Natural Sciences by Eugene Wigner]<br /> <br /> [http://mathoverflow.net/questions/2144/a-single-paper-everyone-should-read/43207#43207 cc-by-sa attribution]<br /> <br /> =====Quantum Mechanical Computers=====<br /> <br /> [http://www.springerlink.com/content/p1x27746x51x52mm/ Quantum Mechanical Computers (PDF) by Richard Feynman].<br /> <br /> :He introduces the idea of quantum computation, describes quantum circuits, explains how classical circuits can be simulated by quantum circuits, and shows how quantum circuits can compute functions without lots of garbage qubits (using uncomputation).<br /> <br /> :He then shows how any classical circuit can be encoded into a time-independent Hamiltonian! His proof goes through for quantum circuits too, therefore showing that time evolving Hamiltonians is BQP-hard! His Hamiltonian construction is also used in the proof of the quantum version of the Cook-Levin theorem, proved by Kitaev, which shows that k-local Hamiltonian is QMA-complete. cc-by-sa [http://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/1168/what-papers-should-everyone-read/1177#1177 attribution]<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Psychology ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * [http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1698090 &quot;Why Do Humans Reason? Arguments for an Argumentative Theory,&quot;] by Hugo Mercier and Dan Sperber, Behavioral and Brain Sciences, Vol. 34, No. 2, pp. 57-74, 2011<br /> : Jonathan Haidt [http://edge.org/conversation/the-argumentative-theory said] &quot;so important that the abstracts... should be posted in psychology departments all over the country.&quot; and that “the article is one of my favorite papers of the last ten years. I believe that they have solved one of the most important and longstanding puzzles in psychology: why are we so good at reasoning in some cases, but so hopelessly biased in others?<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Sociology ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Sociology Papers ====<br /> Sociology is a big field with many branches (e.g. network research, health communication, media effects, organizational communication, classical sociology, etc.). Perhaps it would be better to make top 5's for each?<br /> <br /> * Bowker, G. C., &amp; Star, S. L. (1999). [[Sorting things out: Classification and its consequences]]. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. <br /> * Granovetter, M. (1983). &quot;[[The strength of weak ties: A network theory revisited]]&quot;. Sociological Theory 1: 201–233. doi:[http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/202051 10.2307/202051]. JSTOR 202051.<br /> * Watts, D. J. (2004). [[The new science of networks]]. Annual Review of Sociology, 30(1), 243-270. DOI:[http://dx.doi.org/10.1146/annurev.soc.30.020404.104342 10.1146/annurev.soc.30.020404.104342], see also [http://enwp.org/Mark_Granovetter#The_strength_of_weak_ties]<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> <br /> [[Category:Activity]]</div>

Spanther https://acawiki.org/index.php?title=Why_conceptual_writing%3F_Why_now%3F&diff=6189 2011-09-04T02:55:52Z

<p>Spanther: </p> <hr /> <div>{{Summary<br /> |title=Why conceptual writing? why now?<br /> |authors=Kenneth Goldsmith<br /> |url=http://ubu.com/concept/AgainstExpressionTOC-Essays.pdf<br /> |tags=literature, Technology,<br /> |summary=&quot;Why Conceptual Writing? Why Now?&quot; is an essay that addresses the impact of the Web on the written word. Citing the impact that photographic technology had on painting, Goldsmith claims that a similar restructuring is happening through the convergence of the Internet and writing. &quot;Today,&quot; he claims, &quot;digital media has set the stage for a literary revolution.&quot;<br /> <br /> The reason for this revolution, Goldsmith insists, is a result of the enormous stockpile of language the Internet has made available to anyone with a connection and a computer. Add to this the fact that this vast reserve of words from websites, social media platforms and emails, has the potential to be copied and pasted, mixed and mutated, into various composites and manifestations, and a new type of literature is possible. <br /> <br /> Like the art world's appropriation artists and the music world's sampling DJ's, the literary world now has (thanks to the Internet) a new method with which to construct a new type of writing, or, as Goldsmith and his coterie have dubbed it, &quot;conceptual writing&quot;. Goldsmith claims that the real novelty of this new type of writing now—as opposed to the “cut-up method” employed by William Burroughs and mimeograph and xerox duplication techniques used by previous writers and poets—is a result of faster computers and broadband connections, which has allowed for “the ease of appropriation” in real time rather than the bogged-down constraints of dial-up or the post-production requirements of the typewriter.<br /> <br /> &quot;We deal in active language,” Goldsmith argues, “passing information swiftly for the sake of moving it. To be the originator of something that becomes a broader meme trumps being the originator of the actual trigger event that is being reproduced.&quot;<br /> <br /> Goldsmith denounces originality and creativity in favor of the conceptual writer who compiles and filters texts in a way that emphasizes the “materiality—fluidity, plasticity, malleability” of language. Rather than the traditional methods of the writer or poet who writes all original content via an original voice or style, Goldsmith champions the “uncreative” writer who can make conceptually engaging use of the plenitude of language now available. <br /> <br /> Goldsmith’s use of the words uncreative/creative in this essay can be a bit confusing given that he emphasizes the value of good conceptual ideas—arguably a creative act of imagination. However, he makes it quite clear that it’s the methods of obtaining the language, appropriating vs. imagining, that inform his use of the word “creativity” in the context of this paper.<br /> |relevance=Craig Dworkin's introduction from the same anthology [http://acawiki.org/The_fate_of_echo]<br /> |journal=Introduction from &quot;Against Expression: An Anthology of Conceptual Writing&quot;<br /> |pub_date=2011/01/17<br /> |subject=Arts and Literarure<br /> }}</div>

Spanther https://acawiki.org/index.php?title=AcaWiki:Top_100_Papers&diff=6136 2011-09-01T23:24:00Z

<p>Spanther: /* People */</p> <hr /> <div>We are driving towards gathering summaries of the Top 100 academic papers in the world. This is a large effort to increase the number of our papers, get more students, more researchers, and academics to know about the project and share their specific knowledge. We need your specific expertise to make this project sucessful. <br /> <br /> {{RightTOCLevels|limit=2}}<br /> <br /> = HOWTO =<br /> <br /> The [https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=28656 original idea came from the community].<br /> <br /> To make this work we need to:<br /> <br /> * (DONE) Create a list of the Top 20 Domains<br /> * [[Help:Editing|Help edit this wiki]] (its open for you to help with!)<br /> * Create sources per domain where to pull from.<br /> * Develop leaders per domain<br /> * Get at least 5 papers per domain<br /> ** Think that another paper is more important than the 5 already listed? [[Special:AddData/Summary|Summarize it]] and add it to the list!<br /> <br /> = Additional Resources =<br /> <br /> * [http://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/1168/what-papers-should-everyone-read What papers should everyone read?] - Theoretical Computer Science<br /> <br /> * [http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/10/09/1065676090723.html The five most cited papers]<br /> <br /> * [http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/stats/articles Most Cited Computer Science Articles]<br /> <br /> * [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_important_publications_in_computer_science List of important publications in computer science]<br /> <br /> * [http://in-cites.com/nobel/index.html The 100 Most-Cited Scientists]<br /> <br /> * [http://isihighlycited.com/ ISIHighlyCited.com]<br /> <br /> * [http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/story.asp?storyCode=405956&amp;sectioncode=26 Most cited authors of books in the humanities, 2007]<br /> <br /> * [http://archive.sciencewatch.com/sept-oct2003/sw_sept-oct2003_page2.htm Most-Cited Researchers, 1983-2002]<br /> <br /> * [http://repec.org/ Research Papers in Economics]<br /> <br /> * [http://www.harzing.com/pp_gs.htm Google Scholar - a new data source for citation analysis]<br /> <br /> * [http://wokinfo.com/products_tools/analytical/jcr/ Journal Citation Reports]<br /> <br /> * [http://www.librijournal.org/pdf/2005-4pp170-180.pdf Google Scholar: The New Generation of Citation Indexes]<br /> <br /> * [http://www.librijournal.org/ International Journal of Libraries and Information Services]<br /> <br /> = Collaboration and Communication =<br /> <br /> ''Please join us in spreading the news about this drive, and join us in chat as well!''<br /> <br /> * Public Social Networks<br /> * [[AcaWiki:Communications|Our Communication Channels]]<br /> <br /> = Top 100 Papers =<br /> <br /> == Anthropology ==<br /> <br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Arts and Literature ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> * Username: Spanther<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> =====[[Death of the author]]=====<br /> =====[[What is an author?]]=====<br /> =====[[Why Conceptual Writing? Why Now?]]=====<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Astronomy ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Biology ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Business ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Chemistry ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Clinical Research ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Computer Science ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Stack Exchange: [http://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/1168/what-papers-should-everyone-read What papers should everyone read?]<br /> ** NB: User contributions on Stack Exchange are licensed under [http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/ cc-wiki] with [http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2009/06/attribution-required/ attribution required]<br /> * Turing Award winners [http://twitter.com/RandomlyWalking/status/82385732467032064 (WP)], including papers they've written and the [http://www.informatik.uni-trier.de/~ley/db/journals/cacm/turing.html Turing Award lectures]<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> =====A mathematical theory of communication=====<br /> <br /> &quot;[http://guohanwei.51.net/code/A%20Mathematical%20Theory%20of%20Communication.pdf A mathematical theory of communication]&quot; by Claude Shannon, classics of information theory. Very readable. ([http://cm.bell-labs.com/cm/ms/what/shannonday/shannon1948.pdf Alternative link].)<br /> <br /> cc-by-sa [http://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/1168/what-papers-should-everyone-read/1172#1172 attribution]<br /> <br /> ===== On Computable Numbers, with an Application to the Entscheidungsproblem =====<br /> <br /> The 1936 paper that arguably started computer science:<br /> <br /> Alan Turing, &quot;[http://scholar.google.com/scholar?cluster=16882511564349146333 On Computable Numbers, with an Application to the Entscheidungsproblem]&quot;, Proceedings of the London Mathematical Society s2-42, 230–265, 1937. [http://dx.doi.org/10.1112/plms/s2-42.1.230 doi: 10.1112/plms/s2-42.1.230]<br /> <br /> In just 36 pages, Turing formulates (but does not name) the Turing Machine, recasts Gödel's famous First Incompleteness Theorem in terms of computation, describes the concept of universality, and in the appendix shows that computability by Turing machines is equivalent to computability by λ-definable functions (as studied by Church and Kleene).<br /> <br /> cc-by-sa [http://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/1168/what-papers-should-everyone-read/1170#1170 attribution]<br /> <br /> ===== Can Programming Be Liberated from the von Neumann Style? =====<br /> <br /> &quot;[http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.72.2622&amp;rep=rep1&amp;type=pdf Can Programming Be Liberated from the von Neumann Style? A Functional Style and Its Algebra of Programs]&quot; by John Backus. This is the 1977 ACM Turing Award Lecture in which Backus introduces functional programming to the world. ACM honored Backus with this award for his seminal work on FORTRAN and for being the B in BNF notation used for describing programming language syntax. I found this work to be really inspiring. It caused me to look at computers and programming languages in a whole new way.<br /> <br /> It also represents the kind of paper I wish there were more of. It exposes the inspiration and thought processing behind a nest of ideas without the rigorous but limiting tone of a research paper. It is a shame that researchers have to wait for an opportunity like the ACM Turing Award to be able to express themselves in this mode. Of course, few researchers can write like John Backus. This papers clarity of vision amazes me.<br /> <br /> cc-by-sa [http://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/1168/what-papers-should-everyone-read/6785#6785 attribution] (comments from Paul Topping)<br /> <br /> == Economics ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Education ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> ** [[User:Viovio]]<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> =====[[Crisis in the humanities]]=====<br /> * Summarized! :)<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Engineering ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Geosciences ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Health ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Mathematics ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * [http://mathoverflow.net/questions/2144 mathoverflow: A single paper everyone should read?]<br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> ===== The Yang-Mills Equations over Riemann Surfaces ===== <br /> The Yang-Mills Equations over Riemann Surfaces<br /> Author(s): M. F. Atiyah and R. Bott Source: Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series A, Mathematical and Physical Sciences, Vol. 308, No. 1505 (Mar. 17, 1983), pp. 523-615 Published by: The Royal Society [http://www.jstor.org/stable/37156 copy from JSTOR} [http://dx.doi.org/10.1098/rsta.1983.0017 find by DOI]<br /> : One professor called it &quot;the basis for truly 21st century mathematics.&quot; It is also reportedly accessible by beginning graduate students with some exposure to differential geometry and suitable for independent study or as a reading course. It is a 93 page paper and develops a lot of fundamental constructions and ideas from scratch. Here is [http://www.ams.org/mathscinet-getitem?mr=702806 Martin Guest's review on MathSciNet]. -Justin Kerry at [http://mathoverflow.net/questions/2144/a-single-paper-everyone-should-read/15347#15347 cc-by-sa attribution]<br /> : For about 5 years I carried my copy with me everywhere I went, in an increasingly decrepit 3-ring binder weighed down by page after page of my own notes and explanations. One day, at a conference, a dispute arose over whether the main result of the paper held with integral coefficients or required one to work over the rationals. In the flash of an eye, four or five of us pulled out our copies and opened to the relevant page. Luckily, I was right: integral coefficients. The first time I left home without the paper, it felt like a rite of passage. Or at least that's the way I remember it. – Dan Ramras at [http://mathoverflow.net/questions/2144/a-single-paper-everyone-should-read/15347#15347 cc-by-sa attribution]<br /> <br /> ===== On formally undecidable propositions of Principia Mathematica and related systems =====<br /> Kurt Gödel's [http://www.csee.wvu.edu/~xinl/library/papers/math/Godel.pdf On formally undecidable propositions of Principia Mathematica and related systems]. See [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_Formally_Undecidable_Propositions_of_Principia_Mathematica_and_Related_Systems its Wikipedia article]<br /> <br /> cc-by-sa [http://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/1168/what-papers-should-everyone-read/2218#2218 attribution]<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Medicine ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Neuroscience ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Philosophy ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Physics ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> * Posting a question at [http://physicsoverflow.com/ Physics Overflow] might yield some interesting responses<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> =====The Unreasonable Effectiveness of Mathematics in the Natural Sciences=====<br /> [http://www.ipod.org.uk/reality/reality_wigner.pdf The Unreasonable Effectiveness of Mathematics in the Natural Sciences by Eugene Wigner]<br /> <br /> [http://mathoverflow.net/questions/2144/a-single-paper-everyone-should-read/43207#43207 cc-by-sa attribution]<br /> <br /> =====Quantum Mechanical Computers=====<br /> <br /> [http://www.springerlink.com/content/p1x27746x51x52mm/ Quantum Mechanical Computers (PDF) by Richard Feynman].<br /> <br /> :He introduces the idea of quantum computation, describes quantum circuits, explains how classical circuits can be simulated by quantum circuits, and shows how quantum circuits can compute functions without lots of garbage qubits (using uncomputation).<br /> <br /> :He then shows how any classical circuit can be encoded into a time-independent Hamiltonian! His proof goes through for quantum circuits too, therefore showing that time evolving Hamiltonians is BQP-hard! His Hamiltonian construction is also used in the proof of the quantum version of the Cook-Levin theorem, proved by Kitaev, which shows that k-local Hamiltonian is QMA-complete. cc-by-sa [http://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/1168/what-papers-should-everyone-read/1177#1177 attribution]<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Psychology ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * [http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1698090 &quot;Why Do Humans Reason? Arguments for an Argumentative Theory,&quot;] by Hugo Mercier and Dan Sperber, Behavioral and Brain Sciences, Vol. 34, No. 2, pp. 57-74, 2011<br /> : Jonathan Haidt [http://edge.org/conversation/the-argumentative-theory said] &quot;so important that the abstracts... should be posted in psychology departments all over the country.&quot; and that “the article is one of my favorite papers of the last ten years. I believe that they have solved one of the most important and longstanding puzzles in psychology: why are we so good at reasoning in some cases, but so hopelessly biased in others?<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Sociology ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Sociology Papers ====<br /> Sociology is a big field with many branches (e.g. network research, health communication, media effects, organizational communication, classical sociology, etc.). Perhaps it would be better to make top 5's for each?<br /> <br /> * Bowker, G. C., &amp; Star, S. L. (1999). [[Sorting things out: Classification and its consequences]]. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. <br /> * Granovetter, M. (1983). &quot;[[The strength of weak ties: A network theory revisited]]&quot;. Sociological Theory 1: 201–233. doi:[http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/202051 10.2307/202051]. JSTOR 202051.<br /> * Watts, D. J. (2004). [[The new science of networks]]. Annual Review of Sociology, 30(1), 243-270. DOI:[http://dx.doi.org/10.1146/annurev.soc.30.020404.104342 10.1146/annurev.soc.30.020404.104342], see also [http://enwp.org/Mark_Granovetter#The_strength_of_weak_ties]<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> <br /> [[Category:Activity]]</div>

Spanther https://acawiki.org/index.php?title=AcaWiki:Top_100_Papers&diff=6135 2011-09-01T23:23:42Z

<p>Spanther: /* People */</p> <hr /> <div>We are driving towards gathering summaries of the Top 100 academic papers in the world. This is a large effort to increase the number of our papers, get more students, more researchers, and academics to know about the project and share their specific knowledge. We need your specific expertise to make this project sucessful. <br /> <br /> {{RightTOCLevels|limit=2}}<br /> <br /> = HOWTO =<br /> <br /> The [https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=28656 original idea came from the community].<br /> <br /> To make this work we need to:<br /> <br /> * (DONE) Create a list of the Top 20 Domains<br /> * [[Help:Editing|Help edit this wiki]] (its open for you to help with!)<br /> * Create sources per domain where to pull from.<br /> * Develop leaders per domain<br /> * Get at least 5 papers per domain<br /> ** Think that another paper is more important than the 5 already listed? [[Special:AddData/Summary|Summarize it]] and add it to the list!<br /> <br /> = Additional Resources =<br /> <br /> * [http://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/1168/what-papers-should-everyone-read What papers should everyone read?] - Theoretical Computer Science<br /> <br /> * [http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/10/09/1065676090723.html The five most cited papers]<br /> <br /> * [http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/stats/articles Most Cited Computer Science Articles]<br /> <br /> * [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_important_publications_in_computer_science List of important publications in computer science]<br /> <br /> * [http://in-cites.com/nobel/index.html The 100 Most-Cited Scientists]<br /> <br /> * [http://isihighlycited.com/ ISIHighlyCited.com]<br /> <br /> * [http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/story.asp?storyCode=405956&amp;sectioncode=26 Most cited authors of books in the humanities, 2007]<br /> <br /> * [http://archive.sciencewatch.com/sept-oct2003/sw_sept-oct2003_page2.htm Most-Cited Researchers, 1983-2002]<br /> <br /> * [http://repec.org/ Research Papers in Economics]<br /> <br /> * [http://www.harzing.com/pp_gs.htm Google Scholar - a new data source for citation analysis]<br /> <br /> * [http://wokinfo.com/products_tools/analytical/jcr/ Journal Citation Reports]<br /> <br /> * [http://www.librijournal.org/pdf/2005-4pp170-180.pdf Google Scholar: The New Generation of Citation Indexes]<br /> <br /> * [http://www.librijournal.org/ International Journal of Libraries and Information Services]<br /> <br /> = Collaboration and Communication =<br /> <br /> ''Please join us in spreading the news about this drive, and join us in chat as well!''<br /> <br /> * Public Social Networks<br /> * [[AcaWiki:Communications|Our Communication Channels]]<br /> <br /> = Top 100 Papers =<br /> <br /> == Anthropology ==<br /> <br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Arts and Literature ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> * Spanther<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> =====[[Death of the author]]=====<br /> =====[[What is an author?]]=====<br /> =====[[Why Conceptual Writing? Why Now?]]=====<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Astronomy ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Biology ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Business ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Chemistry ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Clinical Research ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Computer Science ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Stack Exchange: [http://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/1168/what-papers-should-everyone-read What papers should everyone read?]<br /> ** NB: User contributions on Stack Exchange are licensed under [http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/ cc-wiki] with [http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2009/06/attribution-required/ attribution required]<br /> * Turing Award winners [http://twitter.com/RandomlyWalking/status/82385732467032064 (WP)], including papers they've written and the [http://www.informatik.uni-trier.de/~ley/db/journals/cacm/turing.html Turing Award lectures]<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> =====A mathematical theory of communication=====<br /> <br /> &quot;[http://guohanwei.51.net/code/A%20Mathematical%20Theory%20of%20Communication.pdf A mathematical theory of communication]&quot; by Claude Shannon, classics of information theory. Very readable. ([http://cm.bell-labs.com/cm/ms/what/shannonday/shannon1948.pdf Alternative link].)<br /> <br /> cc-by-sa [http://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/1168/what-papers-should-everyone-read/1172#1172 attribution]<br /> <br /> ===== On Computable Numbers, with an Application to the Entscheidungsproblem =====<br /> <br /> The 1936 paper that arguably started computer science:<br /> <br /> Alan Turing, &quot;[http://scholar.google.com/scholar?cluster=16882511564349146333 On Computable Numbers, with an Application to the Entscheidungsproblem]&quot;, Proceedings of the London Mathematical Society s2-42, 230–265, 1937. [http://dx.doi.org/10.1112/plms/s2-42.1.230 doi: 10.1112/plms/s2-42.1.230]<br /> <br /> In just 36 pages, Turing formulates (but does not name) the Turing Machine, recasts Gödel's famous First Incompleteness Theorem in terms of computation, describes the concept of universality, and in the appendix shows that computability by Turing machines is equivalent to computability by λ-definable functions (as studied by Church and Kleene).<br /> <br /> cc-by-sa [http://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/1168/what-papers-should-everyone-read/1170#1170 attribution]<br /> <br /> ===== Can Programming Be Liberated from the von Neumann Style? =====<br /> <br /> &quot;[http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.72.2622&amp;rep=rep1&amp;type=pdf Can Programming Be Liberated from the von Neumann Style? A Functional Style and Its Algebra of Programs]&quot; by John Backus. This is the 1977 ACM Turing Award Lecture in which Backus introduces functional programming to the world. ACM honored Backus with this award for his seminal work on FORTRAN and for being the B in BNF notation used for describing programming language syntax. I found this work to be really inspiring. It caused me to look at computers and programming languages in a whole new way.<br /> <br /> It also represents the kind of paper I wish there were more of. It exposes the inspiration and thought processing behind a nest of ideas without the rigorous but limiting tone of a research paper. It is a shame that researchers have to wait for an opportunity like the ACM Turing Award to be able to express themselves in this mode. Of course, few researchers can write like John Backus. This papers clarity of vision amazes me.<br /> <br /> cc-by-sa [http://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/1168/what-papers-should-everyone-read/6785#6785 attribution] (comments from Paul Topping)<br /> <br /> == Economics ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Education ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> ** [[User:Viovio]]<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> =====[[Crisis in the humanities]]=====<br /> * Summarized! :)<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Engineering ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Geosciences ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Health ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Mathematics ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * [http://mathoverflow.net/questions/2144 mathoverflow: A single paper everyone should read?]<br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> ===== The Yang-Mills Equations over Riemann Surfaces ===== <br /> The Yang-Mills Equations over Riemann Surfaces<br /> Author(s): M. F. Atiyah and R. Bott Source: Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series A, Mathematical and Physical Sciences, Vol. 308, No. 1505 (Mar. 17, 1983), pp. 523-615 Published by: The Royal Society [http://www.jstor.org/stable/37156 copy from JSTOR} [http://dx.doi.org/10.1098/rsta.1983.0017 find by DOI]<br /> : One professor called it &quot;the basis for truly 21st century mathematics.&quot; It is also reportedly accessible by beginning graduate students with some exposure to differential geometry and suitable for independent study or as a reading course. It is a 93 page paper and develops a lot of fundamental constructions and ideas from scratch. Here is [http://www.ams.org/mathscinet-getitem?mr=702806 Martin Guest's review on MathSciNet]. -Justin Kerry at [http://mathoverflow.net/questions/2144/a-single-paper-everyone-should-read/15347#15347 cc-by-sa attribution]<br /> : For about 5 years I carried my copy with me everywhere I went, in an increasingly decrepit 3-ring binder weighed down by page after page of my own notes and explanations. One day, at a conference, a dispute arose over whether the main result of the paper held with integral coefficients or required one to work over the rationals. In the flash of an eye, four or five of us pulled out our copies and opened to the relevant page. Luckily, I was right: integral coefficients. The first time I left home without the paper, it felt like a rite of passage. Or at least that's the way I remember it. – Dan Ramras at [http://mathoverflow.net/questions/2144/a-single-paper-everyone-should-read/15347#15347 cc-by-sa attribution]<br /> <br /> ===== On formally undecidable propositions of Principia Mathematica and related systems =====<br /> Kurt Gödel's [http://www.csee.wvu.edu/~xinl/library/papers/math/Godel.pdf On formally undecidable propositions of Principia Mathematica and related systems]. See [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_Formally_Undecidable_Propositions_of_Principia_Mathematica_and_Related_Systems its Wikipedia article]<br /> <br /> cc-by-sa [http://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/1168/what-papers-should-everyone-read/2218#2218 attribution]<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Medicine ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Neuroscience ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Philosophy ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Physics ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> * Posting a question at [http://physicsoverflow.com/ Physics Overflow] might yield some interesting responses<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> =====The Unreasonable Effectiveness of Mathematics in the Natural Sciences=====<br /> [http://www.ipod.org.uk/reality/reality_wigner.pdf The Unreasonable Effectiveness of Mathematics in the Natural Sciences by Eugene Wigner]<br /> <br /> [http://mathoverflow.net/questions/2144/a-single-paper-everyone-should-read/43207#43207 cc-by-sa attribution]<br /> <br /> =====Quantum Mechanical Computers=====<br /> <br /> [http://www.springerlink.com/content/p1x27746x51x52mm/ Quantum Mechanical Computers (PDF) by Richard Feynman].<br /> <br /> :He introduces the idea of quantum computation, describes quantum circuits, explains how classical circuits can be simulated by quantum circuits, and shows how quantum circuits can compute functions without lots of garbage qubits (using uncomputation).<br /> <br /> :He then shows how any classical circuit can be encoded into a time-independent Hamiltonian! His proof goes through for quantum circuits too, therefore showing that time evolving Hamiltonians is BQP-hard! His Hamiltonian construction is also used in the proof of the quantum version of the Cook-Levin theorem, proved by Kitaev, which shows that k-local Hamiltonian is QMA-complete. cc-by-sa [http://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/1168/what-papers-should-everyone-read/1177#1177 attribution]<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Psychology ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * [http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1698090 &quot;Why Do Humans Reason? Arguments for an Argumentative Theory,&quot;] by Hugo Mercier and Dan Sperber, Behavioral and Brain Sciences, Vol. 34, No. 2, pp. 57-74, 2011<br /> : Jonathan Haidt [http://edge.org/conversation/the-argumentative-theory said] &quot;so important that the abstracts... should be posted in psychology departments all over the country.&quot; and that “the article is one of my favorite papers of the last ten years. I believe that they have solved one of the most important and longstanding puzzles in psychology: why are we so good at reasoning in some cases, but so hopelessly biased in others?<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Sociology ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Sociology Papers ====<br /> Sociology is a big field with many branches (e.g. network research, health communication, media effects, organizational communication, classical sociology, etc.). Perhaps it would be better to make top 5's for each?<br /> <br /> * Bowker, G. C., &amp; Star, S. L. (1999). [[Sorting things out: Classification and its consequences]]. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. <br /> * Granovetter, M. (1983). &quot;[[The strength of weak ties: A network theory revisited]]&quot;. Sociological Theory 1: 201–233. doi:[http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/202051 10.2307/202051]. JSTOR 202051.<br /> * Watts, D. J. (2004). [[The new science of networks]]. Annual Review of Sociology, 30(1), 243-270. DOI:[http://dx.doi.org/10.1146/annurev.soc.30.020404.104342 10.1146/annurev.soc.30.020404.104342], see also [http://enwp.org/Mark_Granovetter#The_strength_of_weak_ties]<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> <br /> [[Category:Activity]]</div>

Spanther https://acawiki.org/index.php?title=AcaWiki:Top_100_Papers&diff=6134 2011-09-01T23:19:08Z

<p>Spanther: /* Papers */</p> <hr /> <div>We are driving towards gathering summaries of the Top 100 academic papers in the world. This is a large effort to increase the number of our papers, get more students, more researchers, and academics to know about the project and share their specific knowledge. We need your specific expertise to make this project sucessful. <br /> <br /> {{RightTOCLevels|limit=2}}<br /> <br /> = HOWTO =<br /> <br /> The [https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=28656 original idea came from the community].<br /> <br /> To make this work we need to:<br /> <br /> * (DONE) Create a list of the Top 20 Domains<br /> * [[Help:Editing|Help edit this wiki]] (its open for you to help with!)<br /> * Create sources per domain where to pull from.<br /> * Develop leaders per domain<br /> * Get at least 5 papers per domain<br /> ** Think that another paper is more important than the 5 already listed? [[Special:AddData/Summary|Summarize it]] and add it to the list!<br /> <br /> = Additional Resources =<br /> <br /> * [http://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/1168/what-papers-should-everyone-read What papers should everyone read?] - Theoretical Computer Science<br /> <br /> * [http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/10/09/1065676090723.html The five most cited papers]<br /> <br /> * [http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/stats/articles Most Cited Computer Science Articles]<br /> <br /> * [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_important_publications_in_computer_science List of important publications in computer science]<br /> <br /> * [http://in-cites.com/nobel/index.html The 100 Most-Cited Scientists]<br /> <br /> * [http://isihighlycited.com/ ISIHighlyCited.com]<br /> <br /> * [http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/story.asp?storyCode=405956&amp;sectioncode=26 Most cited authors of books in the humanities, 2007]<br /> <br /> * [http://archive.sciencewatch.com/sept-oct2003/sw_sept-oct2003_page2.htm Most-Cited Researchers, 1983-2002]<br /> <br /> * [http://repec.org/ Research Papers in Economics]<br /> <br /> * [http://www.harzing.com/pp_gs.htm Google Scholar - a new data source for citation analysis]<br /> <br /> * [http://wokinfo.com/products_tools/analytical/jcr/ Journal Citation Reports]<br /> <br /> * [http://www.librijournal.org/pdf/2005-4pp170-180.pdf Google Scholar: The New Generation of Citation Indexes]<br /> <br /> * [http://www.librijournal.org/ International Journal of Libraries and Information Services]<br /> <br /> = Collaboration and Communication =<br /> <br /> ''Please join us in spreading the news about this drive, and join us in chat as well!''<br /> <br /> * Public Social Networks<br /> * [[AcaWiki:Communications|Our Communication Channels]]<br /> <br /> = Top 100 Papers =<br /> <br /> == Anthropology ==<br /> <br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Arts and Literature ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> =====[[Death of the author]]=====<br /> =====[[What is an author?]]=====<br /> =====[[Why Conceptual Writing? Why Now?]]=====<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Astronomy ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Biology ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Business ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Chemistry ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Clinical Research ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Computer Science ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Stack Exchange: [http://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/1168/what-papers-should-everyone-read What papers should everyone read?]<br /> ** NB: User contributions on Stack Exchange are licensed under [http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/ cc-wiki] with [http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2009/06/attribution-required/ attribution required]<br /> * Turing Award winners [http://twitter.com/RandomlyWalking/status/82385732467032064 (WP)], including papers they've written and the [http://www.informatik.uni-trier.de/~ley/db/journals/cacm/turing.html Turing Award lectures]<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> =====A mathematical theory of communication=====<br /> <br /> &quot;[http://guohanwei.51.net/code/A%20Mathematical%20Theory%20of%20Communication.pdf A mathematical theory of communication]&quot; by Claude Shannon, classics of information theory. Very readable. ([http://cm.bell-labs.com/cm/ms/what/shannonday/shannon1948.pdf Alternative link].)<br /> <br /> cc-by-sa [http://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/1168/what-papers-should-everyone-read/1172#1172 attribution]<br /> <br /> ===== On Computable Numbers, with an Application to the Entscheidungsproblem =====<br /> <br /> The 1936 paper that arguably started computer science:<br /> <br /> Alan Turing, &quot;[http://scholar.google.com/scholar?cluster=16882511564349146333 On Computable Numbers, with an Application to the Entscheidungsproblem]&quot;, Proceedings of the London Mathematical Society s2-42, 230–265, 1937. [http://dx.doi.org/10.1112/plms/s2-42.1.230 doi: 10.1112/plms/s2-42.1.230]<br /> <br /> In just 36 pages, Turing formulates (but does not name) the Turing Machine, recasts Gödel's famous First Incompleteness Theorem in terms of computation, describes the concept of universality, and in the appendix shows that computability by Turing machines is equivalent to computability by λ-definable functions (as studied by Church and Kleene).<br /> <br /> cc-by-sa [http://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/1168/what-papers-should-everyone-read/1170#1170 attribution]<br /> <br /> ===== Can Programming Be Liberated from the von Neumann Style? =====<br /> <br /> &quot;[http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.72.2622&amp;rep=rep1&amp;type=pdf Can Programming Be Liberated from the von Neumann Style? A Functional Style and Its Algebra of Programs]&quot; by John Backus. This is the 1977 ACM Turing Award Lecture in which Backus introduces functional programming to the world. ACM honored Backus with this award for his seminal work on FORTRAN and for being the B in BNF notation used for describing programming language syntax. I found this work to be really inspiring. It caused me to look at computers and programming languages in a whole new way.<br /> <br /> It also represents the kind of paper I wish there were more of. It exposes the inspiration and thought processing behind a nest of ideas without the rigorous but limiting tone of a research paper. It is a shame that researchers have to wait for an opportunity like the ACM Turing Award to be able to express themselves in this mode. Of course, few researchers can write like John Backus. This papers clarity of vision amazes me.<br /> <br /> cc-by-sa [http://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/1168/what-papers-should-everyone-read/6785#6785 attribution] (comments from Paul Topping)<br /> <br /> == Economics ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Education ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> ** [[User:Viovio]]<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> =====[[Crisis in the humanities]]=====<br /> * Summarized! :)<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Engineering ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Geosciences ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Health ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Mathematics ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * [http://mathoverflow.net/questions/2144 mathoverflow: A single paper everyone should read?]<br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> ===== The Yang-Mills Equations over Riemann Surfaces ===== <br /> The Yang-Mills Equations over Riemann Surfaces<br /> Author(s): M. F. Atiyah and R. Bott Source: Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series A, Mathematical and Physical Sciences, Vol. 308, No. 1505 (Mar. 17, 1983), pp. 523-615 Published by: The Royal Society [http://www.jstor.org/stable/37156 copy from JSTOR} [http://dx.doi.org/10.1098/rsta.1983.0017 find by DOI]<br /> : One professor called it &quot;the basis for truly 21st century mathematics.&quot; It is also reportedly accessible by beginning graduate students with some exposure to differential geometry and suitable for independent study or as a reading course. It is a 93 page paper and develops a lot of fundamental constructions and ideas from scratch. Here is [http://www.ams.org/mathscinet-getitem?mr=702806 Martin Guest's review on MathSciNet]. -Justin Kerry at [http://mathoverflow.net/questions/2144/a-single-paper-everyone-should-read/15347#15347 cc-by-sa attribution]<br /> : For about 5 years I carried my copy with me everywhere I went, in an increasingly decrepit 3-ring binder weighed down by page after page of my own notes and explanations. One day, at a conference, a dispute arose over whether the main result of the paper held with integral coefficients or required one to work over the rationals. In the flash of an eye, four or five of us pulled out our copies and opened to the relevant page. Luckily, I was right: integral coefficients. The first time I left home without the paper, it felt like a rite of passage. Or at least that's the way I remember it. – Dan Ramras at [http://mathoverflow.net/questions/2144/a-single-paper-everyone-should-read/15347#15347 cc-by-sa attribution]<br /> <br /> ===== On formally undecidable propositions of Principia Mathematica and related systems =====<br /> Kurt Gödel's [http://www.csee.wvu.edu/~xinl/library/papers/math/Godel.pdf On formally undecidable propositions of Principia Mathematica and related systems]. See [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_Formally_Undecidable_Propositions_of_Principia_Mathematica_and_Related_Systems its Wikipedia article]<br /> <br /> cc-by-sa [http://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/1168/what-papers-should-everyone-read/2218#2218 attribution]<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Medicine ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Neuroscience ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Philosophy ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Physics ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> * Posting a question at [http://physicsoverflow.com/ Physics Overflow] might yield some interesting responses<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> =====The Unreasonable Effectiveness of Mathematics in the Natural Sciences=====<br /> [http://www.ipod.org.uk/reality/reality_wigner.pdf The Unreasonable Effectiveness of Mathematics in the Natural Sciences by Eugene Wigner]<br /> <br /> [http://mathoverflow.net/questions/2144/a-single-paper-everyone-should-read/43207#43207 cc-by-sa attribution]<br /> <br /> =====Quantum Mechanical Computers=====<br /> <br /> [http://www.springerlink.com/content/p1x27746x51x52mm/ Quantum Mechanical Computers (PDF) by Richard Feynman].<br /> <br /> :He introduces the idea of quantum computation, describes quantum circuits, explains how classical circuits can be simulated by quantum circuits, and shows how quantum circuits can compute functions without lots of garbage qubits (using uncomputation).<br /> <br /> :He then shows how any classical circuit can be encoded into a time-independent Hamiltonian! His proof goes through for quantum circuits too, therefore showing that time evolving Hamiltonians is BQP-hard! His Hamiltonian construction is also used in the proof of the quantum version of the Cook-Levin theorem, proved by Kitaev, which shows that k-local Hamiltonian is QMA-complete. cc-by-sa [http://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/1168/what-papers-should-everyone-read/1177#1177 attribution]<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Psychology ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * [http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1698090 &quot;Why Do Humans Reason? Arguments for an Argumentative Theory,&quot;] by Hugo Mercier and Dan Sperber, Behavioral and Brain Sciences, Vol. 34, No. 2, pp. 57-74, 2011<br /> : Jonathan Haidt [http://edge.org/conversation/the-argumentative-theory said] &quot;so important that the abstracts... should be posted in psychology departments all over the country.&quot; and that “the article is one of my favorite papers of the last ten years. I believe that they have solved one of the most important and longstanding puzzles in psychology: why are we so good at reasoning in some cases, but so hopelessly biased in others?<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Sociology ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Sociology Papers ====<br /> Sociology is a big field with many branches (e.g. network research, health communication, media effects, organizational communication, classical sociology, etc.). Perhaps it would be better to make top 5's for each?<br /> <br /> * Bowker, G. C., &amp; Star, S. L. (1999). [[Sorting things out: Classification and its consequences]]. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. <br /> * Granovetter, M. (1983). &quot;[[The strength of weak ties: A network theory revisited]]&quot;. Sociological Theory 1: 201–233. doi:[http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/202051 10.2307/202051]. JSTOR 202051.<br /> * Watts, D. J. (2004). [[The new science of networks]]. Annual Review of Sociology, 30(1), 243-270. DOI:[http://dx.doi.org/10.1146/annurev.soc.30.020404.104342 10.1146/annurev.soc.30.020404.104342], see also [http://enwp.org/Mark_Granovetter#The_strength_of_weak_ties]<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> <br /> [[Category:Activity]]</div>

Spanther https://acawiki.org/index.php?title=AcaWiki:Top_100_Papers&diff=6133 2011-09-01T23:18:36Z

<p>Spanther: /* Papers */</p> <hr /> <div>We are driving towards gathering summaries of the Top 100 academic papers in the world. This is a large effort to increase the number of our papers, get more students, more researchers, and academics to know about the project and share their specific knowledge. We need your specific expertise to make this project sucessful. <br /> <br /> {{RightTOCLevels|limit=2}}<br /> <br /> = HOWTO =<br /> <br /> The [https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=28656 original idea came from the community].<br /> <br /> To make this work we need to:<br /> <br /> * (DONE) Create a list of the Top 20 Domains<br /> * [[Help:Editing|Help edit this wiki]] (its open for you to help with!)<br /> * Create sources per domain where to pull from.<br /> * Develop leaders per domain<br /> * Get at least 5 papers per domain<br /> ** Think that another paper is more important than the 5 already listed? [[Special:AddData/Summary|Summarize it]] and add it to the list!<br /> <br /> = Additional Resources =<br /> <br /> * [http://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/1168/what-papers-should-everyone-read What papers should everyone read?] - Theoretical Computer Science<br /> <br /> * [http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/10/09/1065676090723.html The five most cited papers]<br /> <br /> * [http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/stats/articles Most Cited Computer Science Articles]<br /> <br /> * [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_important_publications_in_computer_science List of important publications in computer science]<br /> <br /> * [http://in-cites.com/nobel/index.html The 100 Most-Cited Scientists]<br /> <br /> * [http://isihighlycited.com/ ISIHighlyCited.com]<br /> <br /> * [http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/story.asp?storyCode=405956&amp;sectioncode=26 Most cited authors of books in the humanities, 2007]<br /> <br /> * [http://archive.sciencewatch.com/sept-oct2003/sw_sept-oct2003_page2.htm Most-Cited Researchers, 1983-2002]<br /> <br /> * [http://repec.org/ Research Papers in Economics]<br /> <br /> * [http://www.harzing.com/pp_gs.htm Google Scholar - a new data source for citation analysis]<br /> <br /> * [http://wokinfo.com/products_tools/analytical/jcr/ Journal Citation Reports]<br /> <br /> * [http://www.librijournal.org/pdf/2005-4pp170-180.pdf Google Scholar: The New Generation of Citation Indexes]<br /> <br /> * [http://www.librijournal.org/ International Journal of Libraries and Information Services]<br /> <br /> = Collaboration and Communication =<br /> <br /> ''Please join us in spreading the news about this drive, and join us in chat as well!''<br /> <br /> * Public Social Networks<br /> * [[AcaWiki:Communications|Our Communication Channels]]<br /> <br /> = Top 100 Papers =<br /> <br /> == Anthropology ==<br /> <br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Arts and Literature ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> =====[[Death of the author]]=====<br /> =====[[What is an author?]]=====<br /> =====[[Why conceptual writing? why now?]]=====<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Astronomy ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Biology ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Business ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Chemistry ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Clinical Research ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Computer Science ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Stack Exchange: [http://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/1168/what-papers-should-everyone-read What papers should everyone read?]<br /> ** NB: User contributions on Stack Exchange are licensed under [http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/ cc-wiki] with [http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2009/06/attribution-required/ attribution required]<br /> * Turing Award winners [http://twitter.com/RandomlyWalking/status/82385732467032064 (WP)], including papers they've written and the [http://www.informatik.uni-trier.de/~ley/db/journals/cacm/turing.html Turing Award lectures]<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> =====A mathematical theory of communication=====<br /> <br /> &quot;[http://guohanwei.51.net/code/A%20Mathematical%20Theory%20of%20Communication.pdf A mathematical theory of communication]&quot; by Claude Shannon, classics of information theory. Very readable. ([http://cm.bell-labs.com/cm/ms/what/shannonday/shannon1948.pdf Alternative link].)<br /> <br /> cc-by-sa [http://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/1168/what-papers-should-everyone-read/1172#1172 attribution]<br /> <br /> ===== On Computable Numbers, with an Application to the Entscheidungsproblem =====<br /> <br /> The 1936 paper that arguably started computer science:<br /> <br /> Alan Turing, &quot;[http://scholar.google.com/scholar?cluster=16882511564349146333 On Computable Numbers, with an Application to the Entscheidungsproblem]&quot;, Proceedings of the London Mathematical Society s2-42, 230–265, 1937. [http://dx.doi.org/10.1112/plms/s2-42.1.230 doi: 10.1112/plms/s2-42.1.230]<br /> <br /> In just 36 pages, Turing formulates (but does not name) the Turing Machine, recasts Gödel's famous First Incompleteness Theorem in terms of computation, describes the concept of universality, and in the appendix shows that computability by Turing machines is equivalent to computability by λ-definable functions (as studied by Church and Kleene).<br /> <br /> cc-by-sa [http://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/1168/what-papers-should-everyone-read/1170#1170 attribution]<br /> <br /> ===== Can Programming Be Liberated from the von Neumann Style? =====<br /> <br /> &quot;[http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.72.2622&amp;rep=rep1&amp;type=pdf Can Programming Be Liberated from the von Neumann Style? A Functional Style and Its Algebra of Programs]&quot; by John Backus. This is the 1977 ACM Turing Award Lecture in which Backus introduces functional programming to the world. ACM honored Backus with this award for his seminal work on FORTRAN and for being the B in BNF notation used for describing programming language syntax. I found this work to be really inspiring. It caused me to look at computers and programming languages in a whole new way.<br /> <br /> It also represents the kind of paper I wish there were more of. It exposes the inspiration and thought processing behind a nest of ideas without the rigorous but limiting tone of a research paper. It is a shame that researchers have to wait for an opportunity like the ACM Turing Award to be able to express themselves in this mode. Of course, few researchers can write like John Backus. This papers clarity of vision amazes me.<br /> <br /> cc-by-sa [http://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/1168/what-papers-should-everyone-read/6785#6785 attribution] (comments from Paul Topping)<br /> <br /> == Economics ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Education ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> ** [[User:Viovio]]<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> =====[[Crisis in the humanities]]=====<br /> * Summarized! :)<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Engineering ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Geosciences ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Health ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Mathematics ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * [http://mathoverflow.net/questions/2144 mathoverflow: A single paper everyone should read?]<br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> ===== The Yang-Mills Equations over Riemann Surfaces ===== <br /> The Yang-Mills Equations over Riemann Surfaces<br /> Author(s): M. F. Atiyah and R. Bott Source: Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series A, Mathematical and Physical Sciences, Vol. 308, No. 1505 (Mar. 17, 1983), pp. 523-615 Published by: The Royal Society [http://www.jstor.org/stable/37156 copy from JSTOR} [http://dx.doi.org/10.1098/rsta.1983.0017 find by DOI]<br /> : One professor called it &quot;the basis for truly 21st century mathematics.&quot; It is also reportedly accessible by beginning graduate students with some exposure to differential geometry and suitable for independent study or as a reading course. It is a 93 page paper and develops a lot of fundamental constructions and ideas from scratch. Here is [http://www.ams.org/mathscinet-getitem?mr=702806 Martin Guest's review on MathSciNet]. -Justin Kerry at [http://mathoverflow.net/questions/2144/a-single-paper-everyone-should-read/15347#15347 cc-by-sa attribution]<br /> : For about 5 years I carried my copy with me everywhere I went, in an increasingly decrepit 3-ring binder weighed down by page after page of my own notes and explanations. One day, at a conference, a dispute arose over whether the main result of the paper held with integral coefficients or required one to work over the rationals. In the flash of an eye, four or five of us pulled out our copies and opened to the relevant page. Luckily, I was right: integral coefficients. The first time I left home without the paper, it felt like a rite of passage. Or at least that's the way I remember it. – Dan Ramras at [http://mathoverflow.net/questions/2144/a-single-paper-everyone-should-read/15347#15347 cc-by-sa attribution]<br /> <br /> ===== On formally undecidable propositions of Principia Mathematica and related systems =====<br /> Kurt Gödel's [http://www.csee.wvu.edu/~xinl/library/papers/math/Godel.pdf On formally undecidable propositions of Principia Mathematica and related systems]. See [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_Formally_Undecidable_Propositions_of_Principia_Mathematica_and_Related_Systems its Wikipedia article]<br /> <br /> cc-by-sa [http://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/1168/what-papers-should-everyone-read/2218#2218 attribution]<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Medicine ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Neuroscience ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Philosophy ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Physics ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> * Posting a question at [http://physicsoverflow.com/ Physics Overflow] might yield some interesting responses<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> =====The Unreasonable Effectiveness of Mathematics in the Natural Sciences=====<br /> [http://www.ipod.org.uk/reality/reality_wigner.pdf The Unreasonable Effectiveness of Mathematics in the Natural Sciences by Eugene Wigner]<br /> <br /> [http://mathoverflow.net/questions/2144/a-single-paper-everyone-should-read/43207#43207 cc-by-sa attribution]<br /> <br /> =====Quantum Mechanical Computers=====<br /> <br /> [http://www.springerlink.com/content/p1x27746x51x52mm/ Quantum Mechanical Computers (PDF) by Richard Feynman].<br /> <br /> :He introduces the idea of quantum computation, describes quantum circuits, explains how classical circuits can be simulated by quantum circuits, and shows how quantum circuits can compute functions without lots of garbage qubits (using uncomputation).<br /> <br /> :He then shows how any classical circuit can be encoded into a time-independent Hamiltonian! His proof goes through for quantum circuits too, therefore showing that time evolving Hamiltonians is BQP-hard! His Hamiltonian construction is also used in the proof of the quantum version of the Cook-Levin theorem, proved by Kitaev, which shows that k-local Hamiltonian is QMA-complete. cc-by-sa [http://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/1168/what-papers-should-everyone-read/1177#1177 attribution]<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Psychology ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * [http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1698090 &quot;Why Do Humans Reason? Arguments for an Argumentative Theory,&quot;] by Hugo Mercier and Dan Sperber, Behavioral and Brain Sciences, Vol. 34, No. 2, pp. 57-74, 2011<br /> : Jonathan Haidt [http://edge.org/conversation/the-argumentative-theory said] &quot;so important that the abstracts... should be posted in psychology departments all over the country.&quot; and that “the article is one of my favorite papers of the last ten years. I believe that they have solved one of the most important and longstanding puzzles in psychology: why are we so good at reasoning in some cases, but so hopelessly biased in others?<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Sociology ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Sociology Papers ====<br /> Sociology is a big field with many branches (e.g. network research, health communication, media effects, organizational communication, classical sociology, etc.). Perhaps it would be better to make top 5's for each?<br /> <br /> * Bowker, G. C., &amp; Star, S. L. (1999). [[Sorting things out: Classification and its consequences]]. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. <br /> * Granovetter, M. (1983). &quot;[[The strength of weak ties: A network theory revisited]]&quot;. Sociological Theory 1: 201–233. doi:[http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/202051 10.2307/202051]. JSTOR 202051.<br /> * Watts, D. J. (2004). [[The new science of networks]]. Annual Review of Sociology, 30(1), 243-270. DOI:[http://dx.doi.org/10.1146/annurev.soc.30.020404.104342 10.1146/annurev.soc.30.020404.104342], see also [http://enwp.org/Mark_Granovetter#The_strength_of_weak_ties]<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> <br /> [[Category:Activity]]</div>

Spanther https://acawiki.org/index.php?title=Why_conceptual_writing%3F_Why_now%3F&diff=6132 2011-09-01T23:17:34Z

<p>Spanther: </p> <hr /> <div>{{Summary<br /> |title=Why conceptual writing? why now?<br /> |authors=Kenneth Goldsmith<br /> |url=http://ubu.com/concept/AgainstExpressionTOC-Essays.pdf<br /> |tags=literature, Technology,<br /> |summary=&quot;Why Conceptual Writing? Why Now?&quot; is an essay that addresses the impact of the Web on the written word. Citing the impact that photographic technology had on painting, Goldsmith claims that a similar restructuring is happening through the convergence of the Internet and writing. &quot;Today,&quot; he claims, &quot;digital media has set the stage for a literary revolution.&quot;<br /> <br /> The reason for this revolution, Goldsmith insists, is a result of the enormous stockpile of language the Internet has made available to anyone with a connection and a computer. Add to this the fact that this vast reserve of words from websites, social media platforms and emails, has the potential to be copied and pasted, mixed and mutated, into various composites and manifestations, and a new type of literature is possible. <br /> <br /> Like the art world's appropriation artists and the music world's sampling DJ's, the literary world now has (thanks to the Internet) a new method with which to construct a new type of writing, or, as Goldsmith and his coterie have dubbed it, &quot;conceptual writing&quot;. Goldsmith claims that the real novelty of this new type of writing now—as opposed to the “cut-up method” employed by William Burroughs and mimeograph and xerox duplication techniques used by previous writers and poets—is a result of faster computers and broadband connections, which has allowed for “the ease of appropriation” in real time rather than the bogged-down constraints of dial-up or the post-production requirements of the typewriter.<br /> <br /> &quot;We deal in active language,” Goldsmith argues, “passing information swiftly for the sake of moving it. To be the originator of something that becomes a broader meme trumps being the originator of the actual trigger event that is being reproduced.&quot;<br /> <br /> Goldsmith denounces originality and creativity in favor of the conceptual writer who compiles and filters texts in a way that emphasizes the “materiality—fluidity, plasticity, malleability” of language. Rather than the traditional methods of the writer or poet who writes all original content via an original voice or style, Goldsmith champions the “uncreative” writer who can make conceptually engaging use of the plenitude of language now available. <br /> <br /> Goldsmith’s use of the words “(un)creative” in this essay can be a bit confusing given that he emphasizes the value of good conceptual ideas—arguably a creative act of imagination. However, he makes it quite clear that it’s the methods of obtaining the language, appropriating vs. imagining, that inform his use of the word “creativity” in the context of this paper.<br /> |journal=Introduction from &quot;Against Expression: An Anthology of Conceptual Writing&quot;<br /> |pub_date=2011/01/17<br /> |subject=Arts and Literarure<br /> }}</div>

Spanther https://acawiki.org/index.php?title=Why_conceptual_writing%3F_Why_now%3F&diff=6131 2011-09-01T23:15:35Z

<p>Spanther: </p> <hr /> <div>{{Summary<br /> |title=Why Conceptual Writing? Why Now?<br /> |authors=Kenneth Goldsmith<br /> |url=http://ubu.com/concept/AgainstExpressionTOC-Essays.pdf<br /> |tags=literature, Technology,<br /> |summary=&quot;Why Conceptual Writing? Why Now?&quot; is an essay that addresses the impact of the Web on the written word. Citing the impact that photographic technology had on painting, Goldsmith claims that a similar restructuring is happening through the convergence of the Internet and writing. &quot;Today,&quot; he claims, &quot;digital media has set the stage for a literary revolution.&quot;<br /> <br /> The reason for this revolution, Goldsmith insists, is a result of the enormous stockpile of language the Internet has made available to anyone with a connection and a computer. Add to this the fact that this vast reserve of words from websites, social media platforms and emails, has the potential to be copied and pasted, mixed and mutated, into various composites and manifestations, and a new type of literature is possible. <br /> <br /> Like the art world's appropriation artists and the music world's sampling DJ's, the literary world now has (thanks to the Internet) a new method with which to construct a new type of writing, or, as Goldsmith and his coterie have dubbed it, &quot;conceptual writing&quot;. Goldsmith claims that the real novelty of this new type of writing now—as opposed to the “cut-up method” employed by William Burroughs and mimeograph and xerox duplication techniques used by previous writers and poets—is a result of faster computers and broadband connections, which has allowed for “the ease of appropriation” in real time rather than the bogged-down constraints of dial-up or the post-production requirements of the typewriter.<br /> <br /> &quot;We deal in active language,” Goldsmith argues, “passing information swiftly for the sake of moving it. To be the originator of something that becomes a broader meme trumps being the originator of the actual trigger event that is being reproduced.&quot;<br /> <br /> Goldsmith denounces originality and creativity in favor of the conceptual writer who compiles and filters texts in a way that emphasizes the “materiality—fluidity, plasticity, malleability” of language. Rather than the traditional methods of the writer or poet who writes all original content via an original voice or style, Goldsmith champions the “uncreative” writer who can make conceptually engaging use of the plenitude of language now available. <br /> <br /> Goldsmith’s use of the words “(un)creative” in this essay can be a bit confusing given that he emphasizes the value of good conceptual ideas—arguably a creative act of imagination. However, he makes it quite clear that it’s the methods of obtaining the language, appropriating vs. imagining, that inform his use of the word “creativity” in the context of this paper.<br /> |journal=Introduction from &quot;Against Expression: An Anthology of Conceptual Writing&quot;<br /> |pub_date=2011/01/17<br /> |subject=Arts and Literarure<br /> }}</div>

Spanther https://acawiki.org/index.php?title=Why_conceptual_writing%3F_Why_now%3F&diff=6130 2011-09-01T23:14:49Z

<p>Spanther: Created page with &quot;{{Summary |title=Why Conceptual Writing? Why Now? |authors=Kenneth Goldsmith |url=http://ubu.com/concept/AgainstExpressionTOC-Essays.pdf |tags=literature, Technology, |summary=&quot;...&quot;</p> <hr /> <div>{{Summary<br /> |title=Why Conceptual Writing? Why Now?<br /> |authors=Kenneth Goldsmith<br /> |url=http://ubu.com/concept/AgainstExpressionTOC-Essays.pdf<br /> |tags=literature, Technology, <br /> |summary=&quot;Why Conceptual Writing? Why Now?&quot; is an essay that addresses the impact of the Web on the written word. Citing the impact that photographic technology had on painting, Goldsmith claims that a similar restructuring is happening through the convergence of the Internet and writing. &quot;Today,&quot; he claims, &quot;digital media has set the stage for a literary revolution.&quot;<br /> <br /> The reason for this revolution, Goldsmith insists, is a result of the enormous stockpile of language the Internet has made available to anyone with a connection and a computer. Add to this the fact that this vast reserve of words from websites, social media platforms and emails, has the potential to be copied and pasted, mixed and mutated, into various composites and manifestations, and a new type of literature is possible. <br /> <br /> Like the art world's appropriation artists and the music world's sampling DJ's, the literary world now has (thanks to the Internet) a new method with which to construct a new type of writing, or, as Goldsmith and his coterie have dubbed it, &quot;conceptual writing&quot;. Goldsmith claims that the real novelty of this new type of writing now—as opposed to the “cut-up method” employed by William Burroughs and mimeograph and xerox duplication techniques used by previous writers and poets—is a result of faster computers and broadband connections, which has allowed for “the ease of appropriation” in real time rather than the bogged-down constraints of dial-up or the post-production requirements of the typewriter.<br /> <br /> &quot;We deal in active language,” Goldsmith argues, “passing information swiftly for the sake of moving it. To be the originator of something that becomes a broader meme trumps being the originator of the actual trigger event that is being reproduced.&quot;<br /> <br /> Goldsmith denounces originality and creativity in favor of the conceptual writer who compiles and filters texts in a way that emphasizes the “materiality—fluidity, plasticity, malleability” of language. Rather than the traditional methods of the writer or poet who writes all original content via an original voice or style, Goldsmith champions the “uncreative” writer who can make conceptually engaging use of the plenitude of language now available. <br /> <br /> Goldsmith’s use of the words “(un)creative” in this essay can be a bit confusing given that he emphasizes the value of good conceptual ideas—arguably a creative act of imagination. However, he makes it quite clear that it’s the methods of obtaining the language, appropriating vs. imagining, that inform his use of the word “creativity” in the context of this paper. <br /> |journal=Against Expression: Introduction from &quot;An Anthology of Conceptual Writing&quot;<br /> |pub_date=2011/01/17<br /> |subject=Arts and Literarure<br /> }}</div>

Spanther https://acawiki.org/index.php?title=What_is_an_author%3F&diff=6113 2011-08-28T00:01:18Z

<p>Spanther: </p> <hr /> <div>{{Summary<br /> |title=What is an author?<br /> |authors=Michel Foucault<br /> |url=http://audio.eserver.org/courses/fall01/tc501/readings/foucault-what_is_an_author.pdf<br /> |tags=literature, Theory,<br /> |summary=Foucault’s &quot;What Is an Author?&quot; was originally delivered as a lecture in 1969, two years after the first English publication of Barthes’ famous essay &quot;[[Death of the Author]], 1967)&quot;. Although never explicitly stated, it’s quite obvious Foucault is directly responding to and criticizing Barthes’ thesis as evidenced by the following statement early in the essay: “A certain number of notions that are intended to replace the privileged position of the author actually seem to preserve that privilege and suppress the real meaning of his disappearance.”<br /> <br /> Both Barthes and Foucault agree the &quot;Author” is an unnatural, historical phenomenon that has unfortunately obtained mythological, heroic status. And both aim to contradict and complicate this status. However, their methods are drastically different.<br /> <br /> If &quot;Death of the Author&quot; actively attempts to kill the Author from the position of full-frontal attack, then &quot;What is an Author?&quot; casually submits to the inevitability of this death and opts instead to further problematize the foundational definitions underlying author and text.<br /> <br /> “[I]t is not enough to declare that we should do without the writer (the author) and study the work itself,” Foucault writes. “The word work and the unity that it designates are probably as problematic as the status of the author's individuality.”<br /> <br /> Here, Foucault poses a series of ontological questions regarding a text. Questions like, Where does one draw a line in an author's oeuvre? What constitutes a work? Should everything an author writes, including notes, scribbles and shopping lists, be considered part of a work?<br /> <br /> He then goes on to question and complicate the author in a similar vein. “'First, we need to clarify briefly the problems arising from the use of the author's name. What is an author's name? How does it function? Far from offering a solution, I shall only indicate some of the difficulties that it presents.”<br /> <br /> After positing the classificatory problems associated with an author’s proper name, Foucault introduces the concept of the “author function” and describes its primary characteristics:<br /> <br /> 1. The &quot;author function&quot; is connected to the legal system. The law insists on holding individuals accountable for subversive or transgressive communications, hence the need for an “author.”<br /> <br /> 2. The &quot;author function&quot; varies according to field and discipline. Anonymity in scientific discourses, for example, is more acceptable than in literary discourses where an author is always demanded in order to situation meaning within the text.<br /> <br /> 3. The &quot;author function&quot; is carried out through &quot;complex operations&quot; and &quot;is not defined by the spontaneous attribution of a discourse to its producer&quot;.<br /> <br /> 4. An &quot;author&quot; doesn't necessarily connote a specific individual; several narrators, selves and subjects confuse and complicate the designation between author and individual.<br /> <br /> Foucault then makes a distinction of an &quot;author function&quot; and how it relates to an individual work versus an entire discourse. Authors who operate in the latter category are what he calls &quot;founders of discursivity&quot; and operate in the unique position of the &quot;transdiscursive&quot;. These are authors like Freud and Marx who &quot;...are unique in that they are not just the authors of their own works. They have produced something else: the possibilities and the rules for the formation of other texts.&quot;<br /> <br /> By the end of &quot;What is an Author?&quot; it becomes clear that Foucault is interested in exhaustively complicating the notion of what it means to be an author through the articulation of “author” alongside its many historical and discursive formations rather than, like Barthes, singling out a generic “Author” to attack.<br /> |relevance=See also [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/What_is_an_Author%3F Wikipedia article]<br /> |journal=Textual Strategies: Perspective in Post-Structuralist Criticism<br /> |pub_date=1979<br /> |subject=Arts and Literarure<br /> }}</div>

Spanther https://acawiki.org/index.php?title=What_is_an_author%3F&diff=6112 2011-08-27T23:44:33Z

<p>Spanther: </p> <hr /> <div>{{Summary<br /> |title=What is an author?<br /> |authors=Michel Foucault<br /> |url=http://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&amp;q=cache:z22xqR5XdqEJ:cmst452.drkissling.com/fall2010/wp-content/uploads/2010/09/foucault-what_is_an_author.pdf+Foucault,+Michel+(1969),+%22What+is+an+Author%3F%22,+in+Harari,+Josué+V.,+Textual+Strategies:+Perspectives+in+Post-Structuralist+Criticism,+Ithaca,+NY:+Cornell+University+Press,+1979&amp;hl=en&amp;gl=us&amp;pid=bl&amp;srcid=ADGEESipe-apz_M1zrJ81ebIfLiuxfHS_1il8zonRWgtZbPLl3Poa_8K9oVvWzHrS5HF4Z0DTro_JsadP_jagKcRYzhJPedqkXJkzjfN9LZHErA3fzHk3oTo76mUQ_4eAjf7-nZDaA9P&amp;sig=AHIEtbQa4NXmHIfVJ1wAOph4wkpJ9I5dTg<br /> |tags=literature, Theory,<br /> |summary=Foucault’s &quot;What Is an Author?&quot; was originally delivered as a lecture in 1969, two years after the first English publication of Barthes’ famous essay &quot;[[Death of the Author]], 1967)&quot;. Although never explicitly stated, it’s quite obvious Foucault is directly responding to and criticizing Barthes’ thesis as evidenced by the following statement early in the essay: “A certain number of notions that are intended to replace the privileged position of the author actually seem to preserve that privilege and suppress the real meaning of his disappearance.”<br /> <br /> Both Barthes and Foucault agree the &quot;Author” is an unnatural, historical phenomenon that has unfortunately obtained mythological, heroic status. And both aim to contradict and complicate this status. However, their methods are drastically different.<br /> <br /> If &quot;Death of the Author&quot; actively attempts to kill the Author from the position of full-frontal attack, then &quot;What is an Author?&quot; casually submits to the inevitability of this death and opts instead to further problematize the foundational definitions underlying author and text.<br /> <br /> “[I]t is not enough to declare that we should do without the writer (the author) and study the work itself,” Foucault writes. “The word work and the unity that it designates are probably as problematic as the status of the author's individuality.”<br /> <br /> Here, Foucault poses a series of ontological questions regarding a text. Questions like, Where does one draw a line in an author's oeuvre? What constitutes a work? Should everything an author writes, including notes, scribbles and shopping lists, be considered part of a work?<br /> <br /> He then goes on to question and complicate the author in a similar vein. “'First, we need to clarify briefly the problems arising from the use of the author's name. What is an author's name? How does it function? Far from offering a solution, I shall only indicate some of the difficulties that it presents.”<br /> <br /> After positing the classificatory problems associated with an author’s proper name, Foucault introduces the concept of the “author function” and describes its primary characteristics:<br /> <br /> 1. The &quot;author function&quot; is connected to the legal system. The law insists on holding individuals accountable for subversive or transgressive communications, hence the need for an “author.”<br /> <br /> 2. The &quot;author function&quot; varies according to field and discipline. Anonymity in scientific discourses, for example, is more acceptable than in literary discourses where an author is always demanded in order to situation meaning within the text.<br /> <br /> 3. The &quot;author function&quot; is carried out through &quot;complex operations&quot; and &quot;is not defined by the spontaneous attribution of a discourse to its producer&quot;.<br /> <br /> 4. An &quot;author&quot; doesn't necessarily connote a specific individual; several narrators, selves and subjects confuse and complicate the designation between author and individual.<br /> <br /> Foucault then makes a distinction of an &quot;author function&quot; and how it relates to an individual work versus an entire discourse. Authors who operate in the latter category are what he calls &quot;founders of discursivity&quot; and operate in the unique position of the &quot;transdiscursive&quot;. These are authors like Freud and Marx who &quot;...are unique in that they are not just the authors of their own works. They have produced something else: the possibilities and the rules for the formation of other texts.&quot;<br /> <br /> By the end of &quot;What is an Author?&quot; it becomes clear that Foucault is interested in exhaustively complicating the notion of what it means to be an author through the articulation of “author” alongside its many historical and discursive formations rather than, like Barthes, singling out a generic “Author” to attack.<br /> |relevance=See also [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/What_is_an_Author%3F Wikipedia article]<br /> |journal=Textual Strategies: Perspective in Post-Structuralist Criticism<br /> |pub_date=1979<br /> |subject=Arts and Literarure<br /> }}</div>

Spanther https://acawiki.org/index.php?title=Death_of_the_author&diff=6111 2011-08-27T18:54:16Z

<p>Spanther: </p> <hr /> <div>{{Summary<br /> |title=Death of the author<br /> |authors=Roland Barthes<br /> |url=http://www.ubu.com/aspen/aspen5and6/threeEssays.html#barthes<br /> |tags=literature, Theory,<br /> |summary=In this seminal essay Barthes disrupts the implied connection between authorship and ownership. An “Author,” Barthes argues, is a modern invention: the notion of a written work being inextricably linked to an author, or &quot;genius,&quot; is a historical one born out of empiricism and rationalism. Barthes also blames critics for bolstering the mythological origins and authenticity of a text whenever they rely on an author's personal life to inform the analysis of an author's work. An &quot;Author's work&quot; is precisely the part Barthes takes issue with—the part where author turns into Author, which suggests ownership of a work. Ownership of meaning and language. <br /> <br /> Barthes cites Mallarme, Valery, and Proust as writers who have actively made an attempt in their own writing to &quot;loosen&quot; this supposed stranglehold between an author and his/her work. Space and time are also invoked. Temporally, Barthes claims an Author is a being who precedes a text, whereas a &quot;modern scriptor&quot;—the figure Barthes heralds as the victor in the death of the Author—is an enunciator who has no authority over a text due to it being &quot;eternally written here and now.&quot; Moreover, spatially a text is invoked as a &quot;multi-dimensional space&quot; involving various formations of folding, blending and crashing as opposed to a linear line of words containing a &quot;single 'theological' meaning&quot;.<br /> <br /> A fixed meaning is precisely what Barthes is attacking in this essay. By killing the Author he purports to open up all texts so that &quot;everything... [can] be disentangled, nothing deciphered&quot;.<br /> <br /> Barthes concludes by shifting emphasis on the Author to the reader. He suggests that when the ties between an Author and his/her text are cut, this then liberates the origins of a text and instead places the emphasis on its destination—the reader. The point being to free language, to allow it to flow without the restrictions of authors, critics, hermeneutic interpretation and overdetermined deciphering.<br /> |relevance=See also [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_of_the_author Wikipedia article] &lt;br/&gt;<br /> Death of The Author also published in Image, Music, Text (1977)<br /> |journal=Aspen, no. 5-6<br /> |pub_date=1967<br /> |subject=Arts and Literarure<br /> }}</div>

Spanther https://acawiki.org/index.php?title=Death_of_the_author&diff=6110 2011-08-27T18:53:30Z

<p>Spanther: </p> <hr /> <div>{{Summary<br /> |title=Death of the author<br /> |authors=Roland Barthes<br /> |url=http://www.ubu.com/aspen/aspen5and6/threeEssays.html#barthes<br /> |tags=literature, Theory,<br /> |summary=In this seminal essay Barthes disrupts the implied connection between authorship and ownership. An “Author,” Barthes argues, is a modern invention: the notion of a written work being inextricably linked to an author, or &quot;genius,&quot; is a historical one born out of empiricism and rationalism. Barthes also blames critics for bolstering the mythological origins and authenticity of a text whenever they rely on an author's personal life to inform the analysis of an author's work. An &quot;Author's work&quot; is precisely the part Barthes takes issue with—the part where author turns into Author, which suggests ownership of a work. Ownership of meaning and language. <br /> <br /> Barthes cites Mallarme, Valery, and Proust as writers who have actively made an attempt in their own writing to &quot;loosen&quot; this supposed stranglehold between an author and his/her work. Space and time are also invoked. Temporally, Barthes claims an Author is a being who precedes a text, whereas a &quot;modern scriptor&quot;—the figure Barthes heralds as the victor in the death of the Author—is an enunciator who has no authority over a text due to it being &quot;eternally written here and now.&quot; Moreover, spatially a text is invoked as a &quot;multi-dimensional space&quot; involving various formations of folding, blending and crashing as opposed to a linear line of words containing a &quot;single 'theological' meaning&quot;.<br /> <br /> A fixed meaning is precisely what Barthes is attacking in this essay. By killing the Author he purports to open up all texts so that &quot;everything... [can] be disentangled, nothing deciphered&quot;.<br /> <br /> Barthes concludes by shifting emphasis on the Author to the reader. He suggests that when the ties between an Author and his/her text are cut, this then liberates the origins of a text and instead places the emphasis on its destination—the reader. The point being to free language, to allow it to flow without the restrictions of authors, critics, hermeneutic interpretation and overdetermined deciphering.<br /> |relevance=See also [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_of_the_author Wikipedia article] &lt;br/&gt;<br /> Death of The Author also published in Image, Music, Text, 1977<br /> |journal=Aspen, no. 5-6<br /> |pub_date=1967<br /> |subject=Arts and Literarure<br /> }}</div>

Spanther https://acawiki.org/index.php?title=Death_of_the_author&diff=6109 2011-08-27T17:47:47Z

<p>Spanther: </p> <hr /> <div>{{Summary<br /> |title=Death of the author<br /> |authors=Roland Barthes<br /> |url=http://www.ubu.com/aspen/aspen5and6/threeEssays.html#barthes<br /> |tags=literature, Theory,<br /> |summary=In this seminal essay Barthes disrupts the implied connection between authorship and ownership. An “Author,” Barthes argues, is a modern invention: the notion of a written work being inextricably linked to an author, or &quot;genius,&quot; is a historical one born out of empiricism and rationalism. Barthes also blames critics for bolstering the mythological origins and authenticity of a text whenever they rely on an author's personal life to inform the analysis of an author's work. An &quot;Author's work&quot; is precisely the part Barthes takes issue with—the part where author turns into Author, which suggests ownership of a work. Ownership of meaning and language. <br /> <br /> Barthes cites Mallarme, Valery, and Proust as writers who have actively made an attempt in their own writing to &quot;loosen&quot; this supposed stranglehold between an author and his/her work. Space and time are also invoked. Temporally, Barthes claims an Author is a being who precedes a text, whereas a &quot;modern scriptor&quot;—the figure Barthes heralds as the victor in the death of the Author—is an enunciator who has no authority over a text due to it being &quot;eternally written here and now.&quot; Moreover, spatially a text is invoked as a &quot;multi-dimensional space&quot; involving various formations of folding, blending and crashing as opposed to a linear line of words containing a &quot;single 'theological' meaning&quot;.<br /> <br /> A fixed meaning is precisely what Barthes is attacking in this essay. By killing the Author he purports to open up all texts so that &quot;everything... [can] be disentangled, nothing deciphered&quot;.<br /> <br /> Barthes concludes by shifting emphasis on the Author to the reader. He suggests that when the ties between an Author and his/her text are cut, this then liberates the origins of a text and instead places the emphasis on its destination—the reader. The point being to free language, to allow it to flow without the restrictions of authors, critics, hermeneutic interpretation and overdetermined deciphering.<br /> |relevance=See also [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_of_the_author Wikipedia article]<br /> Death of The Author also published in Image, Music, Text, 1977<br /> |journal=Aspen, no. 5-6<br /> |pub_date=1967<br /> |subject=Arts and Literarure<br /> }}</div>

Spanther https://acawiki.org/index.php?title=AcaWiki:Top_100_Papers&diff=6106 2011-08-27T03:00:02Z

<p>Spanther: /* Death of the author */</p> <hr /> <div>We are driving towards gathering summaries of the Top 100 academic papers in the world. This is a large effort to increase the number of our papers, get more students, more researchers, and academics to know about the project and share their specific knowledge. We need your specific expertise to make this project sucessful. <br /> <br /> {{RightTOCLevels|limit=2}}<br /> <br /> = HOWTO =<br /> <br /> The [https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=28656 original idea came from the community].<br /> <br /> To make this work we need to:<br /> <br /> * (DONE) Create a list of the Top 20 Domains<br /> * [[Help:Editing|Help edit this wiki]] (its open for you to help with!)<br /> * Create sources per domain where to pull from.<br /> * Develop leaders per domain<br /> * Get at least 5 papers per domain<br /> ** Think that another paper is more important than the 5 already listed? [[Special:AddData/Summary|Summarize it]] and add it to the list!<br /> <br /> = Additional Resources =<br /> <br /> * [http://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/1168/what-papers-should-everyone-read What papers should everyone read?] - Theoretical Computer Science<br /> <br /> * [http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/10/09/1065676090723.html The five most cited papers]<br /> <br /> * [http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/stats/articles Most Cited Computer Science Articles]<br /> <br /> * [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_important_publications_in_computer_science List of important publications in computer science]<br /> <br /> * [http://in-cites.com/nobel/index.html The 100 Most-Cited Scientists]<br /> <br /> * [http://isihighlycited.com/ ISIHighlyCited.com]<br /> <br /> * [http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/story.asp?storyCode=405956&amp;sectioncode=26 Most cited authors of books in the humanities, 2007]<br /> <br /> * [http://archive.sciencewatch.com/sept-oct2003/sw_sept-oct2003_page2.htm Most-Cited Researchers, 1983-2002]<br /> <br /> * [http://repec.org/ Research Papers in Economics]<br /> <br /> * [http://www.harzing.com/pp_gs.htm Google Scholar - a new data source for citation analysis]<br /> <br /> * [http://wokinfo.com/products_tools/analytical/jcr/ Journal Citation Reports]<br /> <br /> * [http://www.librijournal.org/pdf/2005-4pp170-180.pdf Google Scholar: The New Generation of Citation Indexes]<br /> <br /> * [http://www.librijournal.org/ International Journal of Libraries and Information Services]<br /> <br /> = Collaboration and Communication =<br /> <br /> ''Please join us in spreading the news about this drive, and join us in chat as well!''<br /> <br /> * Public Social Networks<br /> * [[AcaWiki:Communications|Our Communication Channels]]<br /> <br /> = Top 100 Papers =<br /> <br /> == Anthropology ==<br /> <br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Arts and Literature ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> =====[[Death of the author]]=====<br /> =====[[What is an author?]]=====<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Astronomy ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Biology ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Business ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Chemistry ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Clinical Research ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Computer Science ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Stack Exchange: [http://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/1168/what-papers-should-everyone-read What papers should everyone read?]<br /> ** NB: User contributions on Stack Exchange are licensed under [http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/ cc-wiki] with [http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2009/06/attribution-required/ attribution required]<br /> * Turing Award winners [http://twitter.com/RandomlyWalking/status/82385732467032064 (WP)], including papers they've written and the [http://www.informatik.uni-trier.de/~ley/db/journals/cacm/turing.html Turing Award lectures]<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> =====A mathematical theory of communication=====<br /> <br /> &quot;[http://guohanwei.51.net/code/A%20Mathematical%20Theory%20of%20Communication.pdf A mathematical theory of communication]&quot; by Claude Shannon, classics of information theory. Very readable. ([http://cm.bell-labs.com/cm/ms/what/shannonday/shannon1948.pdf Alternative link].)<br /> <br /> cc-by-sa [http://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/1168/what-papers-should-everyone-read/1172#1172 attribution]<br /> <br /> ===== On Computable Numbers, with an Application to the Entscheidungsproblem =====<br /> <br /> The 1936 paper that arguably started computer science:<br /> <br /> Alan Turing, &quot;[http://scholar.google.com/scholar?cluster=16882511564349146333 On Computable Numbers, with an Application to the Entscheidungsproblem]&quot;, Proceedings of the London Mathematical Society s2-42, 230–265, 1937. [http://dx.doi.org/10.1112/plms/s2-42.1.230 doi: 10.1112/plms/s2-42.1.230]<br /> <br /> In just 36 pages, Turing formulates (but does not name) the Turing Machine, recasts Gödel's famous First Incompleteness Theorem in terms of computation, describes the concept of universality, and in the appendix shows that computability by Turing machines is equivalent to computability by λ-definable functions (as studied by Church and Kleene).<br /> <br /> cc-by-sa [http://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/1168/what-papers-should-everyone-read/1170#1170 attribution]<br /> <br /> ===== Can Programming Be Liberated from the von Neumann Style? =====<br /> <br /> &quot;[http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.72.2622&amp;rep=rep1&amp;type=pdf Can Programming Be Liberated from the von Neumann Style? A Functional Style and Its Algebra of Programs]&quot; by John Backus. This is the 1977 ACM Turing Award Lecture in which Backus introduces functional programming to the world. ACM honored Backus with this award for his seminal work on FORTRAN and for being the B in BNF notation used for describing programming language syntax. I found this work to be really inspiring. It caused me to look at computers and programming languages in a whole new way.<br /> <br /> It also represents the kind of paper I wish there were more of. It exposes the inspiration and thought processing behind a nest of ideas without the rigorous but limiting tone of a research paper. It is a shame that researchers have to wait for an opportunity like the ACM Turing Award to be able to express themselves in this mode. Of course, few researchers can write like John Backus. This papers clarity of vision amazes me.<br /> <br /> cc-by-sa [http://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/1168/what-papers-should-everyone-read/6785#6785 attribution] (comments from Paul Topping)<br /> <br /> == Economics ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Education ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> ** [[User:Viovio]]<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> =====[[Crisis in the humanities]]=====<br /> * Summarized! :)<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Engineering ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Geosciences ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Health ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Mathematics ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * [http://mathoverflow.net/questions/2144 mathoverflow: A single paper everyone should read?]<br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> ===== The Yang-Mills Equations over Riemann Surfaces ===== <br /> The Yang-Mills Equations over Riemann Surfaces<br /> Author(s): M. F. Atiyah and R. Bott Source: Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series A, Mathematical and Physical Sciences, Vol. 308, No. 1505 (Mar. 17, 1983), pp. 523-615 Published by: The Royal Society [http://www.jstor.org/stable/37156 copy from JSTOR} [http://dx.doi.org/10.1098/rsta.1983.0017 find by DOI]<br /> : One professor called it &quot;the basis for truly 21st century mathematics.&quot; It is also reportedly accessible by beginning graduate students with some exposure to differential geometry and suitable for independent study or as a reading course. It is a 93 page paper and develops a lot of fundamental constructions and ideas from scratch. Here is [http://www.ams.org/mathscinet-getitem?mr=702806 Martin Guest's review on MathSciNet]. -Justin Kerry at [http://mathoverflow.net/questions/2144/a-single-paper-everyone-should-read/15347#15347 cc-by-sa attribution]<br /> : For about 5 years I carried my copy with me everywhere I went, in an increasingly decrepit 3-ring binder weighed down by page after page of my own notes and explanations. One day, at a conference, a dispute arose over whether the main result of the paper held with integral coefficients or required one to work over the rationals. In the flash of an eye, four or five of us pulled out our copies and opened to the relevant page. Luckily, I was right: integral coefficients. The first time I left home without the paper, it felt like a rite of passage. Or at least that's the way I remember it. – Dan Ramras at [http://mathoverflow.net/questions/2144/a-single-paper-everyone-should-read/15347#15347 cc-by-sa attribution]<br /> <br /> ===== On formally undecidable propositions of Principia Mathematica and related systems =====<br /> Kurt Gödel's [http://www.csee.wvu.edu/~xinl/library/papers/math/Godel.pdf On formally undecidable propositions of Principia Mathematica and related systems]. See [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_Formally_Undecidable_Propositions_of_Principia_Mathematica_and_Related_Systems its Wikipedia article]<br /> <br /> cc-by-sa [http://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/1168/what-papers-should-everyone-read/2218#2218 attribution]<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Medicine ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Neuroscience ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Philosophy ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Physics ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> * Posting a question at [http://physicsoverflow.com/ Physics Overflow] might yield some interesting responses<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> =====The Unreasonable Effectiveness of Mathematics in the Natural Sciences=====<br /> [http://www.ipod.org.uk/reality/reality_wigner.pdf The Unreasonable Effectiveness of Mathematics in the Natural Sciences by Eugene Wigner]<br /> <br /> [http://mathoverflow.net/questions/2144/a-single-paper-everyone-should-read/43207#43207 cc-by-sa attribution]<br /> <br /> =====Quantum Mechanical Computers=====<br /> <br /> [http://www.springerlink.com/content/p1x27746x51x52mm/ Quantum Mechanical Computers (PDF) by Richard Feynman].<br /> <br /> :He introduces the idea of quantum computation, describes quantum circuits, explains how classical circuits can be simulated by quantum circuits, and shows how quantum circuits can compute functions without lots of garbage qubits (using uncomputation).<br /> <br /> :He then shows how any classical circuit can be encoded into a time-independent Hamiltonian! His proof goes through for quantum circuits too, therefore showing that time evolving Hamiltonians is BQP-hard! His Hamiltonian construction is also used in the proof of the quantum version of the Cook-Levin theorem, proved by Kitaev, which shows that k-local Hamiltonian is QMA-complete. cc-by-sa [http://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/1168/what-papers-should-everyone-read/1177#1177 attribution]<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Psychology ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * [http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1698090 &quot;Why Do Humans Reason? Arguments for an Argumentative Theory,&quot;] by Hugo Mercier and Dan Sperber, Behavioral and Brain Sciences, Vol. 34, No. 2, pp. 57-74, 2011<br /> : Jonathan Haidt [http://edge.org/conversation/the-argumentative-theory said] &quot;so important that the abstracts... should be posted in psychology departments all over the country.&quot; and that “the article is one of my favorite papers of the last ten years. I believe that they have solved one of the most important and longstanding puzzles in psychology: why are we so good at reasoning in some cases, but so hopelessly biased in others?<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Sociology ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Sociology Papers ====<br /> Sociology is a big field with many branches (e.g. network research, health communication, media effects, organizational communication, classical sociology, etc.). Perhaps it would be better to make top 5's for each?<br /> <br /> * Bowker, G. C., &amp; Star, S. L. (1999). [[Sorting things out: Classification and its consequences]]. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. <br /> * Granovetter, M. (1983). &quot;[[The strength of weak ties: A network theory revisited]]&quot;. Sociological Theory 1: 201–233. doi:[http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/202051 10.2307/202051]. JSTOR 202051.<br /> * Watts, D. J. (2004). [[The new science of networks]]. Annual Review of Sociology, 30(1), 243-270. DOI:[http://dx.doi.org/10.1146/annurev.soc.30.020404.104342 10.1146/annurev.soc.30.020404.104342], see also [http://enwp.org/Mark_Granovetter#The_strength_of_weak_ties]<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> <br /> [[Category:Activity]]</div>

Spanther https://acawiki.org/index.php?title=What_is_an_author%3F&diff=6105 2011-08-27T02:58:29Z

<p>Spanther: </p> <hr /> <div>{{Summary<br /> |title=What is an author?<br /> |authors=Michel Foucault<br /> |url=http://www.scribd.com/doc/10268982/Foucault-What-is-an-Author<br /> |tags=literature, Theory,<br /> |summary=Foucault’s &quot;What Is an Author?&quot; was originally delivered as a lecture in 1969, two years after the first English publication of Barthes’ famous essay &quot;Death of the Author ([http://acawiki.org/Death_of_the_author Acawiki summary], 1967)&quot;. Although never explicitly stated, it’s quite obvious Foucault is directly responding to and criticizing Barthes’ thesis as evidenced by the following statement early in the essay: “A certain number of notions that are intended to replace the privileged position of the author actually seem to preserve that privilege and suppress the real meaning of his disappearance.”<br /> <br /> Both Barthes and Foucault agree the &quot;Author” is an unnatural, historical phenomenon that has unfortunately obtained mythological, heroic status. And both aim to contradict and complicate this status. However, their methods are drastically different.<br /> <br /> If &quot;Death of the Author&quot; actively attempts to kill the Author from the position of full-frontal attack, then &quot;What is an Author?&quot; casually submits to the inevitability of this death and opts instead to further problematize the foundational definitions underlying author and text.<br /> <br /> “[I]t is not enough to declare that we should do without the writer (the author) and study the work itself,” Foucault writes. “The word work and the unity that it designates are probably as problematic as the status of the author's individuality.”<br /> <br /> Here, Foucault poses a series of ontological questions regarding a text. Questions like, Where does one draw a line in an author's oeuvre? What constitutes a work? Should everything an author writes, including notes, scribbles and shopping lists, be considered part of a work?<br /> <br /> He then goes on to question and complicate the author in a similar vein. “'First, we need to clarify briefly the problems arising from the use of the author's name. What is an author's name? How does it function? Far from offering a solution, I shall only indicate some of the difficulties that it presents.”<br /> <br /> After positing the classificatory problems associated with an author’s proper name, Foucault introduces the concept of the “author function” and describes its primary characteristics:<br /> <br /> 1. The &quot;author function&quot; is connected to the legal system. The law insists on holding individuals accountable for subversive or transgressive communications, hence the need for an “author.”<br /> <br /> 2. The &quot;author function&quot; varies according to field and discipline. Anonymity in scientific discourses, for example, is more acceptable than in literary discourses where an author is always demanded in order to situation meaning within the text.<br /> <br /> 3. The &quot;author function&quot; is carried out through &quot;complex operations&quot; and &quot;is not defined by the spontaneous attribution of a discourse to its producer&quot;.<br /> <br /> 4. An &quot;author&quot; doesn't necessarily connote a specific individual; several narrators, selves and subjects confuse and complicate the designation between author and individual.<br /> <br /> Foucault then makes a distinction of an &quot;author function&quot; and how it relates to an individual work versus an entire discourse. Authors who operate in the latter category are what he calls &quot;founders of discursivity&quot; and operate in the unique position of the &quot;transdiscursive&quot;. These are authors like Freud and Marx who &quot;...are unique in that they are not just the authors of their own works. They have produced something else: the possibilities and the rules for the formation of other texts.&quot;<br /> <br /> By the end of &quot;What is an Author?&quot; it becomes clear that Foucault is interested in exhaustively complicating the notion of what it means to be an author through the articulation of “author” alongside its many historical and discursive formations rather than, like Barthes, singling out a generic “Author” to attack.<br /> |relevance=See Also [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/What_is_an_Author%3F Wikipedia article]<br /> |journal=Textual Strategies: Perspective in Post-Structuralist Criticism<br /> |pub_date=1979<br /> |subject=Arts and Literarure<br /> }}</div>

Spanther https://acawiki.org/index.php?title=What_is_an_author%3F&diff=6104 2011-08-27T02:49:34Z

<p>Spanther: Created page with &quot;{{Summary |title=What is an author? |authors=Michel Foucault |url=http://www.scribd.com/doc/10268982/Foucault-What-is-an-Author |tags=literature, Theory, |summary=Foucault’s &quot;...&quot;</p> <hr /> <div>{{Summary<br /> |title=What is an author?<br /> |authors=Michel Foucault<br /> |url=http://www.scribd.com/doc/10268982/Foucault-What-is-an-Author<br /> |tags=literature, Theory, <br /> |summary=Foucault’s &quot;What Is an Author?&quot; was originally delivered as a lecture in 1969, two years after the first English publication of Barthes’ famous essay &quot;Death of the Author (link, 1967)&quot;. Although never explicitly stated, it’s quite obvious Foucault is directly responding to and criticizing Barthes’ thesis as evidenced by the following statement early in the essay: “A certain number of notions that are intended to replace the privileged position of the author actually seem to preserve that privilege and suppress the real meaning of his disappearance.”<br /> <br /> Both Barthes and Foucault agree the &quot;Author” is an unnatural, historical phenomenon that has unfortunately obtained mythological, heroic status. And both aim to contradict and complicate this status. However, their methods are drastically different.<br /> <br /> If Death of the Author actively attempts to kill the Author from the position of full-frontal attack, then What is an Author? casually submits to the inevitability of this death and opts instead to further problematize the foundational definitions underlying author and text.<br /> <br /> “[I]t is not enough to declare that we should do without the writer (the author) and study the work itself,” Foucault writes. “The word work and the unity that it designates are probably as problematic as the status of the author's individuality.”<br /> <br /> Here, Foucault poses a series of ontological questions regarding a text. Questions like, Where does one draw a line in an author's oeuvre? What constitutes a work? Should everything an author writes, including notes, scribbles and shopping lists, be considered part of a work?<br /> <br /> He then goes on to question and complicate the author in a similar vein. “'First, we need to clarify briefly the problems arising from the use of the author's name. What is an author's name? How does it function? Far from offering a solution, I shall only indicate some of the difficulties that it presents.”<br /> <br /> After positing the classificatory problems associated with an author’s proper name, Foucault introduces the concept of the “author function” and describes its primary characteristics:<br /> <br /> 1. The &quot;author function&quot; is connected to the legal system. The law insists on holding individuals accountable for subversive or transgressive communications, hence the need for an “author.”<br /> <br /> 2. The &quot;author function&quot; varies according to field and discipline. Anonymity in scientific discourses, for example, is more acceptable than in literary discourses where an author is always demanded in order to situation meaning within the text.<br /> <br /> 3. The &quot;author function&quot; is carried out through &quot;complex operations&quot; and &quot;is not defined by the spontaneous attribution of a discourse to its producer&quot;.<br /> <br /> 4. An &quot;author&quot; doesn't necessarily connote a specific individual; several narrators, selves and subjects confuse and complicate the designation between author and individual.<br /> <br /> Foucault then makes a distinction of an &quot;author function&quot; and how it relates to an individual work versus an entire discourse. Authors who operate in the latter category are what he calls &quot;founders of discursivity&quot; and operate in the unique position of the &quot;transdiscursive&quot;. These are authors like Freud and Marx who &quot;...are unique in that they are not just the authors of their own works. They have produced something else: the possibilities and the rules for the formation of other texts.&quot;<br /> <br /> By the end of What is an Author? it becomes clear that Foucault is interested in exhaustively complicating the notion of what it means to be an author through the articulation of “author” alongside its many historical and discursive formations rather than, like Barthes, singling out a generic “Author” to attack.<br /> |journal=Textual Strategies: Perspective in Post-Structuralist Criticism<br /> |pub_date=1979<br /> |subject=Arts and Literarure<br /> }}</div>

Spanther https://acawiki.org/index.php?title=Death_of_the_author&diff=6103 2011-08-26T23:05:22Z

<p>Spanther: </p> <hr /> <div>{{Summary<br /> |title=Death of the author<br /> |authors=Roland Barthes<br /> |url=http://www.ubu.com/aspen/aspen5and6/threeEssays.html#barthes<br /> |tags=literature, Theory,<br /> |summary=In this seminal essay Barthes disrupts the implied connection between authorship and ownership. An “Author,” Barthes argues, is a modern invention: the notion of a written work being inextricably linked to an author, or &quot;genius,&quot; is a historical one born out of empiricism and rationalism. Barthes also blames critics for bolstering the mythological origins and authenticity of a text whenever they rely on an author's personal life to inform the analysis of an author's work. An &quot;Author's work&quot; is precisely the part Barthes takes issue with—the part where author turns into Author, which suggests ownership of a work. Ownership of meaning and language. <br /> <br /> Barthes cites Mallarme, Valery, and Proust as writers who have actively made an attempt in their own writing to &quot;loosen&quot; this supposed stranglehold between an author and his/her work. Space and time are also invoked. Temporally, Barthes claims an Author is a being who precedes a text, whereas a &quot;modern scriptor&quot;—the figure Barthes heralds as the victor in the death of the Author—is an enunciator who has no authority over a text due to it being &quot;eternally written here and now.&quot; Moreover, spatially a text is invoked as a &quot;multi-dimensional space&quot; involving various formations of folding, blending and crashing as opposed to a linear line of words containing a &quot;single 'theological' meaning&quot;.<br /> <br /> A fixed meaning is precisely what Barthes is attacking in this essay. By killing the Author he purports to open up all texts so that &quot;everything... [can] be disentangled, nothing deciphered&quot;.<br /> <br /> Barthes concludes by shifting emphasis on the Author to the reader. He suggests that when the ties between an Author and his/her text are cut, this then liberates the origins of a text and instead places the emphasis on its destination—the reader. The point being to free language, to allow it to flow without the restrictions of authors, critics, hermeneutic interpretation and overdetermined deciphering.<br /> |relevance=See also [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_of_the_author Wikipedia article]<br /> |journal=Aspen, no. 5-6; Image, Music, Text<br /> |pub_date=1967; 1977<br /> |subject=Arts and Literarure<br /> }}</div>

Spanther https://acawiki.org/index.php?title=Death_of_the_author&diff=6102 2011-08-26T23:04:41Z

<p>Spanther: </p> <hr /> <div>{{Summary<br /> |title=Death of the author<br /> |authors=Roland Barthes<br /> |url=http://www.ubu.com/aspen/aspen5and6/threeEssays.html#barthes<br /> |tags=literature, Theory,<br /> |summary=In this seminal essay Barthes disrupts the implied connection between authorship and ownership. An “Author,” Barthes argues, is a modern invention: the notion of a written work being inextricably linked to an author, or &quot;genius,&quot; is a historical one born out of empiricism and rationalism. Barthes also blames critics for bolstering the mythological origins and authenticity of a text whenever they rely on an author's personal life to inform the analysis of an author's work. An &quot;Author's work&quot; is precisely the part Barthes takes issue with—the part where author turns into Author, which suggests ownership of a work. Ownership of meaning and language. <br /> <br /> Barthes cites Mallarme, Valery, and Proust as writers who have actively made an attempt in their own writing to &quot;loosen&quot; this supposed stranglehold between an author and his/her work. Space and time are also invoked. Temporally, Barthes claims an Author is a being who precedes a text, whereas a &quot;modern scriptor&quot;—the figure Barthes heralds as the victor in the death of the Author—is an enunciator who has no authority over a text due to it being &quot;eternally written here and now.&quot; Moreover, spatially a text is invoked as a &quot;multi-dimensional space&quot; involving various formations of folding, blending and crashing as opposed to a linear line of words containing a &quot;single 'theological' meaning&quot;.<br /> <br /> A fixed meaning is precisely what Barthes is attacking in this essay. By killing the Author he purports to open up all texts so that &quot;everything... [can] be disentangled, nothing deciphered&quot;.<br /> <br /> Barthes concludes by shifting emphasis on the Author to the reader. He suggests that when the ties between an Author and his/her text are cut, this then liberates the origins of a text and instead places the emphasis on its destination—the reader. The point being to free language, to allow it to flow without the restrictions of authors, critics, hermeneutic interpretation and overdetermined deciphering.<br /> |relevance=See also [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_of_the_author Wikipedia article]<br /> |journal=Aspen, no. 5-6 AND Image, Music, Text<br /> |pub_date=1967 AND 1977<br /> |subject=Arts and Literarure<br /> }}</div>

Spanther https://acawiki.org/index.php?title=Death_of_the_author&diff=6101 2011-08-26T23:03:40Z

<p>Spanther: </p> <hr /> <div>{{Summary<br /> |title=Death of the author<br /> |authors=Roland Barthes<br /> |url=http://www.ubu.com/aspen/aspen5and6/threeEssays.html#barthes<br /> |tags=literature, Theory,<br /> |summary=In this seminal essay Barthes disrupts the implied connection between authorship and ownership. An “Author,” Barthes argues, is a modern invention: the notion of a written work being inextricably linked to an author, or &quot;genius,&quot; is a historical one born out of empiricism and rationalism. Barthes also blames critics for bolstering the mythological origins and authenticity of a text whenever they rely on an author's personal life to inform the analysis of an author's work. An &quot;Author's work&quot; is precisely the part Barthes takes issue with—the part where author turns into Author, which suggests ownership of a work. Ownership of meaning and language. <br /> <br /> Barthes cites Mallarme, Valery, and Proust as writers who have actively made an attempt in their own writing to &quot;loosen&quot; this supposed stranglehold between an author and his/her work. Space and time are also invoked. Temporally, Barthes claims an Author is a being who precedes a text, whereas a &quot;modern scriptor&quot;—the figure Barthes heralds as the victor in the death of the Author—is an enunciator who has no authority over a text due to it being &quot;eternally written here and now.&quot; Moreover, spatially a text is invoked as a &quot;multi-dimensional space&quot; involving various formations of folding, blending and crashing as opposed to a linear line of words containing a &quot;single 'theological' meaning&quot;.<br /> <br /> A fixed meaning is precisely what Barthes is attacking in this essay. By killing the Author he purports to open up all texts so that &quot;everything... [can] be disentangled, nothing deciphered&quot;.<br /> <br /> Barthes concludes by shifting emphasis on the Author to the reader. He suggests that when the ties between an Author and his/her text are cut, this then liberates the origins of a text and instead places the emphasis on its destination—the reader. The point being to free language, to allow it to flow without the restrictions of authors, critics, hermeneutic interpretation and overdetermined deciphering.<br /> |relevance=See also [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_of_the_author Wikipedia article]<br /> |journal=Aspen, no. 5-6/Image, Music, Text<br /> |pub_date=1967/1977<br /> |subject=Arts and Literarure<br /> }}</div>

Spanther https://acawiki.org/index.php?title=AcaWiki:Top_100_Papers&diff=6097 2011-08-24T04:23:53Z

<p>Spanther: /* Papers */</p> <hr /> <div>We are driving towards gathering summaries of the Top 100 academic papers in the world. This is a large effort to increase the number of our papers, get more students, more researchers, and academics to know about the project and share their specific knowledge. We need your specific expertise to make this project sucessful. <br /> <br /> {{RightTOCLevels|limit=2}}<br /> <br /> = HOWTO =<br /> <br /> The [https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=28656 original idea came from the community].<br /> <br /> To make this work we need to:<br /> <br /> * (DONE) Create a list of the Top 20 Domains<br /> * [[Help:Editing|Help edit this wiki]] (its open for you to help with!)<br /> * Create sources per domain where to pull from.<br /> * Develop leaders per domain<br /> * Get at least 5 papers per domain<br /> ** Think that another paper is more important than the 5 already listed? [[Special:AddData/Summary|Summarize it]] and add it to the list!<br /> <br /> = Additional Resources =<br /> <br /> * [http://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/1168/what-papers-should-everyone-read What papers should everyone read?] - Theoretical Computer Science<br /> <br /> * [http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/10/09/1065676090723.html The five most cited papers]<br /> <br /> * [http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/stats/articles Most Cited Computer Science Articles]<br /> <br /> * [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_important_publications_in_computer_science List of important publications in computer science]<br /> <br /> * [http://in-cites.com/nobel/index.html The 100 Most-Cited Scientists]<br /> <br /> * [http://isihighlycited.com/ ISIHighlyCited.com]<br /> <br /> * [http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/story.asp?storyCode=405956&amp;sectioncode=26 Most cited authors of books in the humanities, 2007]<br /> <br /> * [http://archive.sciencewatch.com/sept-oct2003/sw_sept-oct2003_page2.htm Most-Cited Researchers, 1983-2002]<br /> <br /> * [http://repec.org/ Research Papers in Economics]<br /> <br /> * [http://www.harzing.com/pp_gs.htm Google Scholar - a new data source for citation analysis]<br /> <br /> * [http://wokinfo.com/products_tools/analytical/jcr/ Journal Citation Reports]<br /> <br /> * [http://www.librijournal.org/pdf/2005-4pp170-180.pdf Google Scholar: The New Generation of Citation Indexes]<br /> <br /> * [http://www.librijournal.org/ International Journal of Libraries and Information Services]<br /> <br /> = Collaboration and Communication =<br /> <br /> ''Please join us in spreading the news about this drive, and join us in chat as well!''<br /> <br /> * Public Social Networks<br /> * [[AcaWiki:Communications|Our Communication Channels]]<br /> <br /> = Top 100 Papers =<br /> <br /> == Anthropology ==<br /> <br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Arts and Literature ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> =====[[Death of the author]]=====<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Astronomy ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Biology ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Business ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Chemistry ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Clinical Research ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Computer Science ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Stack Exchange: [http://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/1168/what-papers-should-everyone-read What papers should everyone read?]<br /> ** NB: User contributions on Stack Exchange are licensed under [http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/ cc-wiki] with [http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2009/06/attribution-required/ attribution required]<br /> * Turing Award winners [http://twitter.com/RandomlyWalking/status/82385732467032064 (WP)], including papers they've written and the [http://www.informatik.uni-trier.de/~ley/db/journals/cacm/turing.html Turing Award lectures]<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> =====A mathematical theory of communication=====<br /> <br /> &quot;[http://guohanwei.51.net/code/A%20Mathematical%20Theory%20of%20Communication.pdf A mathematical theory of communication]&quot; by Claude Shannon, classics of information theory. Very readable. ([http://cm.bell-labs.com/cm/ms/what/shannonday/shannon1948.pdf Alternative link].)<br /> <br /> cc-by-sa [http://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/1168/what-papers-should-everyone-read/1172#1172 attribution]<br /> <br /> ===== On Computable Numbers, with an Application to the Entscheidungsproblem =====<br /> <br /> The 1936 paper that arguably started computer science:<br /> <br /> Alan Turing, &quot;[http://scholar.google.com/scholar?cluster=16882511564349146333 On Computable Numbers, with an Application to the Entscheidungsproblem]&quot;, Proceedings of the London Mathematical Society s2-42, 230–265, 1937. [http://dx.doi.org/10.1112/plms/s2-42.1.230 doi: 10.1112/plms/s2-42.1.230]<br /> <br /> In just 36 pages, Turing formulates (but does not name) the Turing Machine, recasts Gödel's famous First Incompleteness Theorem in terms of computation, describes the concept of universality, and in the appendix shows that computability by Turing machines is equivalent to computability by λ-definable functions (as studied by Church and Kleene).<br /> <br /> cc-by-sa [http://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/1168/what-papers-should-everyone-read/1170#1170 attribution]<br /> <br /> ===== Can Programming Be Liberated from the von Neumann Style? =====<br /> <br /> &quot;[http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.72.2622&amp;rep=rep1&amp;type=pdf Can Programming Be Liberated from the von Neumann Style? A Functional Style and Its Algebra of Programs]&quot; by John Backus. This is the 1977 ACM Turing Award Lecture in which Backus introduces functional programming to the world. ACM honored Backus with this award for his seminal work on FORTRAN and for being the B in BNF notation used for describing programming language syntax. I found this work to be really inspiring. It caused me to look at computers and programming languages in a whole new way.<br /> <br /> It also represents the kind of paper I wish there were more of. It exposes the inspiration and thought processing behind a nest of ideas without the rigorous but limiting tone of a research paper. It is a shame that researchers have to wait for an opportunity like the ACM Turing Award to be able to express themselves in this mode. Of course, few researchers can write like John Backus. This papers clarity of vision amazes me.<br /> <br /> cc-by-sa [http://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/1168/what-papers-should-everyone-read/6785#6785 attribution] (comments from Paul Topping)<br /> <br /> == Economics ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Education ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> ** [[User:Viovio]]<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> =====[[Crisis in the humanities]]=====<br /> * Summarized! :)<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Engineering ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Geosciences ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Health ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Mathematics ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * [http://mathoverflow.net/questions/2144 mathoverflow: A single paper everyone should read?]<br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> ===== The Yang-Mills Equations over Riemann Surfaces ===== <br /> The Yang-Mills Equations over Riemann Surfaces<br /> Author(s): M. F. Atiyah and R. Bott Source: Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series A, Mathematical and Physical Sciences, Vol. 308, No. 1505 (Mar. 17, 1983), pp. 523-615 Published by: The Royal Society [http://www.jstor.org/stable/37156 copy from JSTOR} [http://dx.doi.org/10.1098/rsta.1983.0017 find by DOI]<br /> : One professor called it &quot;the basis for truly 21st century mathematics.&quot; It is also reportedly accessible by beginning graduate students with some exposure to differential geometry and suitable for independent study or as a reading course. It is a 93 page paper and develops a lot of fundamental constructions and ideas from scratch. Here is [http://www.ams.org/mathscinet-getitem?mr=702806 Martin Guest's review on MathSciNet]. -Justin Kerry at [http://mathoverflow.net/questions/2144/a-single-paper-everyone-should-read/15347#15347 cc-by-sa attribution]<br /> : For about 5 years I carried my copy with me everywhere I went, in an increasingly decrepit 3-ring binder weighed down by page after page of my own notes and explanations. One day, at a conference, a dispute arose over whether the main result of the paper held with integral coefficients or required one to work over the rationals. In the flash of an eye, four or five of us pulled out our copies and opened to the relevant page. Luckily, I was right: integral coefficients. The first time I left home without the paper, it felt like a rite of passage. Or at least that's the way I remember it. – Dan Ramras at [http://mathoverflow.net/questions/2144/a-single-paper-everyone-should-read/15347#15347 cc-by-sa attribution]<br /> <br /> ===== On formally undecidable propositions of Principia Mathematica and related systems =====<br /> Kurt Gödel's [http://www.csee.wvu.edu/~xinl/library/papers/math/Godel.pdf On formally undecidable propositions of Principia Mathematica and related systems]. See [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_Formally_Undecidable_Propositions_of_Principia_Mathematica_and_Related_Systems its Wikipedia article]<br /> <br /> cc-by-sa [http://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/1168/what-papers-should-everyone-read/2218#2218 attribution]<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Medicine ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Neuroscience ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Philosophy ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Physics ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> * Posting a question at [http://physicsoverflow.com/ Physics Overflow] might yield some interesting responses<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> =====The Unreasonable Effectiveness of Mathematics in the Natural Sciences=====<br /> [http://www.ipod.org.uk/reality/reality_wigner.pdf The Unreasonable Effectiveness of Mathematics in the Natural Sciences by Eugene Wigner]<br /> <br /> [http://mathoverflow.net/questions/2144/a-single-paper-everyone-should-read/43207#43207 cc-by-sa attribution]<br /> <br /> =====Quantum Mechanical Computers=====<br /> <br /> [http://www.springerlink.com/content/p1x27746x51x52mm/ Quantum Mechanical Computers (PDF) by Richard Feynman].<br /> <br /> :He introduces the idea of quantum computation, describes quantum circuits, explains how classical circuits can be simulated by quantum circuits, and shows how quantum circuits can compute functions without lots of garbage qubits (using uncomputation).<br /> <br /> :He then shows how any classical circuit can be encoded into a time-independent Hamiltonian! His proof goes through for quantum circuits too, therefore showing that time evolving Hamiltonians is BQP-hard! His Hamiltonian construction is also used in the proof of the quantum version of the Cook-Levin theorem, proved by Kitaev, which shows that k-local Hamiltonian is QMA-complete. cc-by-sa [http://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/1168/what-papers-should-everyone-read/1177#1177 attribution]<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Psychology ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * [http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1698090 &quot;Why Do Humans Reason? Arguments for an Argumentative Theory,&quot;] by Hugo Mercier and Dan Sperber, Behavioral and Brain Sciences, Vol. 34, No. 2, pp. 57-74, 2011<br /> : Jonathan Haidt [http://edge.org/conversation/the-argumentative-theory said] &quot;so important that the abstracts... should be posted in psychology departments all over the country.&quot; and that “the article is one of my favorite papers of the last ten years. I believe that they have solved one of the most important and longstanding puzzles in psychology: why are we so good at reasoning in some cases, but so hopelessly biased in others?<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Sociology ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Sociology Papers ====<br /> Sociology is a big field with many branches (e.g. network research, health communication, media effects, organizational communication, classical sociology, etc.). Perhaps it would be better to make top 5's for each?<br /> <br /> * Bowker, G. C., &amp; Star, S. L. (1999). [[Sorting things out: Classification and its consequences]]. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. <br /> * Granovetter, M. (1983). &quot;[[The strength of weak ties: A network theory revisited]]&quot;. Sociological Theory 1: 201–233. doi:[http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/202051 10.2307/202051]. JSTOR 202051.<br /> * Watts, D. J. (2004). [[The new science of networks]]. Annual Review of Sociology, 30(1), 243-270. DOI:[http://dx.doi.org/10.1146/annurev.soc.30.020404.104342 10.1146/annurev.soc.30.020404.104342], see also [http://enwp.org/Mark_Granovetter#The_strength_of_weak_ties]<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> <br /> [[Category:Activity]]</div>

Spanther https://acawiki.org/index.php?title=Death_of_the_author&diff=6096 2011-08-24T04:22:07Z

<p>Spanther: Created page with &quot;{{Summary |title=Death of the author |authors=Roland Barthes |url=http://www.ubu.com/aspen/aspen5and6/threeEssays.html#barthes |tags=literature, Theory, |summary=In this seminal...&quot;</p> <hr /> <div>{{Summary<br /> |title=Death of the author<br /> |authors=Roland Barthes<br /> |url=http://www.ubu.com/aspen/aspen5and6/threeEssays.html#barthes<br /> |tags=literature, Theory, <br /> |summary=In this seminal essay Barthes disrupts the implied connection between authorship and ownership. An “Author,” Barthes argues, is a modern invention: the notion of a written work being inextricably linked to an author, or &quot;genius,&quot; is a historical one born out of empiricism and rationalism. Barthes also blames critics for bolstering the mythological origins and authenticity of a text whenever they rely on an author's personal life to inform the analysis of an author's work. An &quot;Author's work&quot; is precisely the part Barthes takes issue with—the part where author turns into Author, which suggests ownership of a work. Ownership of meaning and language. <br /> <br /> Barthes cites Mallarme, Valery, and Proust as writers who have actively made an attempt in their own writing to &quot;loosen&quot; this supposed stranglehold between an author and his/her work. Space and time are also invoked. Temporally, Barthes claims an Author is a being who precedes a text, whereas a &quot;modern scriptor&quot;—the figure Barthes heralds as the victor in the death of the Author—is an enunciator who has no authority over a text due to it being &quot;eternally written here and now.&quot; Moreover, spatially a text is invoked as a &quot;multi-dimensional space&quot; involving various formations of folding, blending and crashing as opposed to a linear line of words containing a &quot;single 'theological' meaning&quot;.<br /> <br /> A fixed meaning is precisely what Barthes is attacking in this essay. By killing the Author he purports to open up all texts so that &quot;everything... [can] be disentangled, nothing deciphered&quot;.<br /> <br /> Barthes concludes by shifting emphasis on the Author to the reader. He suggests that when the ties between an Author and his/her text are cut, this then liberates the origins of a text and instead places the emphasis on its destination—the reader. The point being to free language, to allow it to flow without the restrictions of authors, critics, hermeneutic interpretation and overdetermined deciphering. <br /> <br /> |journal=from Image, Music, Text<br /> |pub_date=1977<br /> |subject=Arts and Literarure<br /> }}</div>

Spanther https://acawiki.org/index.php?title=AcaWiki:Top_100_Papers&diff=5941 2011-07-30T18:11:39Z

<p>Spanther: /* Crisis in the Humanities */</p> <hr /> <div>We are driving towards gathering summaries of the Top 100 academic papers in the world. This is a large effort to increase the number of our papers, get more students, more researchers, and academics to know about the project and share their specific knowledge. We need your specific expertise to make this project sucessful. <br /> <br /> {{RightTOCLevels|limit=2}}<br /> <br /> = HOWTO =<br /> <br /> The [https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=28656 original idea came from the community].<br /> <br /> To make this work we need to:<br /> <br /> * (DONE) Create a list of the Top 20 Domains<br /> * [[Help:Editing|Help edit this wiki]] (its open for you to help with!)<br /> * Create sources per domain where to pull from.<br /> * Develop leaders per domain<br /> * Get at least 5 papers per domain<br /> ** Think that another paper is more important than the 5 already listed? [[Special:AddData/Summary|Summarize it]] and add it to the list!<br /> <br /> = Additional Resources =<br /> <br /> * [http://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/1168/what-papers-should-everyone-read What papers should everyone read?] - Theoretical Computer Science<br /> <br /> * [http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/10/09/1065676090723.html The five most cited papers]<br /> <br /> * [http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/stats/articles Most Cited Computer Science Articles]<br /> <br /> * [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_important_publications_in_computer_science List of important publications in computer science]<br /> <br /> * [http://in-cites.com/nobel/index.html The 100 Most-Cited Scientists]<br /> <br /> * [http://isihighlycited.com/ ISIHighlyCited.com]<br /> <br /> * [http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/story.asp?storyCode=405956&amp;sectioncode=26 Most cited authors of books in the humanities, 2007]<br /> <br /> * [http://archive.sciencewatch.com/sept-oct2003/sw_sept-oct2003_page2.htm Most-Cited Researchers, 1983-2002]<br /> <br /> * [http://repec.org/ Research Papers in Economics]<br /> <br /> * [http://www.harzing.com/pp_gs.htm Google Scholar - a new data source for citation analysis]<br /> <br /> * [http://wokinfo.com/products_tools/analytical/jcr/ Journal Citation Reports]<br /> <br /> * [http://www.librijournal.org/pdf/2005-4pp170-180.pdf Google Scholar: The New Generation of Citation Indexes]<br /> <br /> * [http://www.librijournal.org/ International Journal of Libraries and Information Services]<br /> <br /> = Collaboration and Communication =<br /> <br /> ''Please join us in spreading the news about this drive, and join us in chat as well!''<br /> <br /> * Public Social Networks<br /> * [[AcaWiki:Communications|Our Communication Channels]]<br /> <br /> = Top 100 Papers =<br /> <br /> == Anthropology ==<br /> <br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Arts and Literature ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Astronomy ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Biology ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Business ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Chemistry ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Clinical Research ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Computer Science ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Stack Exchange: [http://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/1168/what-papers-should-everyone-read What papers should everyone read?]<br /> ** NB: User contributions on Stack Exchange are licensed under [http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/ cc-wiki] with [http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2009/06/attribution-required/ attribution required]<br /> * Turing Award winners [http://twitter.com/RandomlyWalking/status/82385732467032064 (WP)], including papers they've written and the [http://www.informatik.uni-trier.de/~ley/db/journals/cacm/turing.html Turing Award lectures]<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> =====A mathematical theory of communication=====<br /> <br /> &quot;[http://guohanwei.51.net/code/A%20Mathematical%20Theory%20of%20Communication.pdf A mathematical theory of communication]&quot; by Claude Shannon, classics of information theory. Very readable. ([http://cm.bell-labs.com/cm/ms/what/shannonday/shannon1948.pdf Alternative link].)<br /> <br /> cc-by-sa [http://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/1168/what-papers-should-everyone-read/1172#1172 attribution]<br /> <br /> ===== On Computable Numbers, with an Application to the Entscheidungsproblem =====<br /> <br /> The 1936 paper that arguably started computer science:<br /> <br /> Alan Turing, &quot;[http://scholar.google.com/scholar?cluster=16882511564349146333 On Computable Numbers, with an Application to the Entscheidungsproblem]&quot;, Proceedings of the London Mathematical Society s2-42, 230–265, 1937. [http://dx.doi.org/10.1112/plms/s2-42.1.230 doi: 10.1112/plms/s2-42.1.230]<br /> <br /> In just 36 pages, Turing formulates (but does not name) the Turing Machine, recasts Gödel's famous First Incompleteness Theorem in terms of computation, describes the concept of universality, and in the appendix shows that computability by Turing machines is equivalent to computability by λ-definable functions (as studied by Church and Kleene).<br /> <br /> cc-by-sa [http://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/1168/what-papers-should-everyone-read/1170#1170 attribution]<br /> <br /> ===== Can Programming Be Liberated from the von Neumann Style? =====<br /> <br /> &quot;[http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.72.2622&amp;rep=rep1&amp;type=pdf Can Programming Be Liberated from the von Neumann Style? A Functional Style and Its Algebra of Programs]&quot; by John Backus. This is the 1977 ACM Turing Award Lecture in which Backus introduces functional programming to the world. ACM honored Backus with this award for his seminal work on FORTRAN and for being the B in BNF notation used for describing programming language syntax. I found this work to be really inspiring. It caused me to look at computers and programming languages in a whole new way.<br /> <br /> It also represents the kind of paper I wish there were more of. It exposes the inspiration and thought processing behind a nest of ideas without the rigorous but limiting tone of a research paper. It is a shame that researchers have to wait for an opportunity like the ACM Turing Award to be able to express themselves in this mode. Of course, few researchers can write like John Backus. This papers clarity of vision amazes me.<br /> <br /> cc-by-sa [http://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/1168/what-papers-should-everyone-read/6785#6785 attribution] (comments from Paul Topping)<br /> <br /> == Economics ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Education ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> ** [[User:Viovio]]<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> =====Crisis in the Humanities=====<br /> &quot;[http://epc.buffalo.edu/authors/perloff/articles/crisis.html Crisis in the Humanities]&quot; by Marjorie Perloff.<br /> In this paper, Marjorie Perloff, professor emeritus at Stanford, responds to an ongoing problem within Humanities departments: being attacked as irrelevant by other disciplines and failing to provide pragmatic training for its PHD students. In a section titled &quot;What are the Humanities?&quot;, Perloff posits the difficulty of various institutions to agree on a definition of and role for the Humanities as the crux of the problem. As a response, she outlines the lineage of literature/poetics (due to it being &quot;one of the central branches of the Humanities”) by defining its role and exhaustively tracing its heterogeneous components (rhetoric, in particular) through such diverse thinkers as Plato and Aristotle to Wittgenstein and Adorno. The real crisis, Perloff suggests, is literature's literal loss of being studied in and of itself. Rather than the usual ontological treatment other disciplines reserve for their own subjects/objects of study, Perloff points to a trend within the Humanities that uses art and literature as &quot;merely a conduit for meaning above and beyond it.&quot; Here, cultural and critical studies are condemned for relegating literary works as a merely a means to prop up various historical and cultural theories as opposed to appreciating them on their own grounds, as an end in and of themselves. Perloff concludes by prompting a return to &quot;more knowledge of actual art works and a great emphasis on induction&quot; as one way to preserve the Humanities and its resources. But she also points to a continuous trend of re-engagement with art and literature in popular culture (e.g. The Futururists and Marcel Proust) as a sign that the Humanities aren't about to disappear anytime soon, and concludes on a positive note asserting the inevitability of the Humanities to survive due to the nature of its origins and pleasure of its products.<br /> http://acawiki.org/Crisis_in_the_Humanities <br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Engineering ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Geosciences ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Health ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Mathematics ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * [http://mathoverflow.net/questions/2144 mathoverflow: A single paper everyone should read?]<br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> ===== The Yang-Mills Equations over Riemann Surfaces ===== <br /> The Yang-Mills Equations over Riemann Surfaces<br /> Author(s): M. F. Atiyah and R. Bott Source: Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series A, Mathematical and Physical Sciences, Vol. 308, No. 1505 (Mar. 17, 1983), pp. 523-615 Published by: The Royal Society [http://www.jstor.org/stable/37156 copy from JSTOR} [http://dx.doi.org/10.1098/rsta.1983.0017 find by DOI]<br /> : One professor called it &quot;the basis for truly 21st century mathematics.&quot; It is also reportedly accessible by beginning graduate students with some exposure to differential geometry and suitable for independent study or as a reading course. It is a 93 page paper and develops a lot of fundamental constructions and ideas from scratch. Here is [http://www.ams.org/mathscinet-getitem?mr=702806 Martin Guest's review on MathSciNet]. -Justin Kerry at [http://mathoverflow.net/questions/2144/a-single-paper-everyone-should-read/15347#15347 cc-by-sa attribution]<br /> : For about 5 years I carried my copy with me everywhere I went, in an increasingly decrepit 3-ring binder weighed down by page after page of my own notes and explanations. One day, at a conference, a dispute arose over whether the main result of the paper held with integral coefficients or required one to work over the rationals. In the flash of an eye, four or five of us pulled out our copies and opened to the relevant page. Luckily, I was right: integral coefficients. The first time I left home without the paper, it felt like a rite of passage. Or at least that's the way I remember it. – Dan Ramras at [http://mathoverflow.net/questions/2144/a-single-paper-everyone-should-read/15347#15347 cc-by-sa attribution]<br /> <br /> ===== On formally undecidable propositions of Principia Mathematica and related systems =====<br /> Kurt Gödel's [http://www.csee.wvu.edu/~xinl/library/papers/math/Godel.pdf On formally undecidable propositions of Principia Mathematica and related systems]. See [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_Formally_Undecidable_Propositions_of_Principia_Mathematica_and_Related_Systems its Wikipedia article]<br /> <br /> cc-by-sa [http://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/1168/what-papers-should-everyone-read/2218#2218 attribution]<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Medicine ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Neuroscience ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Philosophy ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Physics ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> * Posting a question at [http://physicsoverflow.com/ Physics Overflow] might yield some interesting responses<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> =====The Unreasonable Effectiveness of Mathematics in the Natural Sciences=====<br /> [http://www.ipod.org.uk/reality/reality_wigner.pdf The Unreasonable Effectiveness of Mathematics in the Natural Sciences by Eugene Wigner]<br /> <br /> [http://mathoverflow.net/questions/2144/a-single-paper-everyone-should-read/43207#43207 cc-by-sa attribution]<br /> <br /> =====Quantum Mechanical Computers=====<br /> <br /> [http://www.springerlink.com/content/p1x27746x51x52mm/ Quantum Mechanical Computers (PDF) by Richard Feynman].<br /> <br /> :He introduces the idea of quantum computation, describes quantum circuits, explains how classical circuits can be simulated by quantum circuits, and shows how quantum circuits can compute functions without lots of garbage qubits (using uncomputation).<br /> <br /> :He then shows how any classical circuit can be encoded into a time-independent Hamiltonian! His proof goes through for quantum circuits too, therefore showing that time evolving Hamiltonians is BQP-hard! His Hamiltonian construction is also used in the proof of the quantum version of the Cook-Levin theorem, proved by Kitaev, which shows that k-local Hamiltonian is QMA-complete. cc-by-sa [http://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/1168/what-papers-should-everyone-read/1177#1177 attribution]<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Psychology ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * [http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1698090 &quot;Why Do Humans Reason? Arguments for an Argumentative Theory,&quot;] by Hugo Mercier and Dan Sperber, Behavioral and Brain Sciences, Vol. 34, No. 2, pp. 57-74, 2011<br /> : Jonathan Haidt [http://edge.org/conversation/the-argumentative-theory said] &quot;so important that the abstracts... should be posted in psychology departments all over the country.&quot; and that “the article is one of my favorite papers of the last ten years. I believe that they have solved one of the most important and longstanding puzzles in psychology: why are we so good at reasoning in some cases, but so hopelessly biased in others?<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Sociology ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Sociology Papers ====<br /> Sociology is a big field with many branches (e.g. network research, health communication, media effects, organizational communication, classical sociology, etc.). Perhaps it would be better to make top 5's for each?<br /> <br /> * Bowker, G. C., &amp; Star, S. L. (1999). [[Sorting things out: Classification and its consequences]]. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. <br /> * Granovetter, M. (1983). &quot;[[The strength of weak ties: A network theory revisited]]&quot;. Sociological Theory 1: 201–233. doi:[http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/202051 10.2307/202051]. JSTOR 202051.<br /> * Watts, D. J. (2004). [[The new science of networks]]. Annual Review of Sociology, 30(1), 243-270. DOI:[http://dx.doi.org/10.1146/annurev.soc.30.020404.104342 10.1146/annurev.soc.30.020404.104342], see also [http://enwp.org/Mark_Granovetter#The_strength_of_weak_ties]<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> <br /> [[Category:Activity]]</div>

Spanther https://acawiki.org/index.php?title=Crisis_in_the_humanities&diff=5940 2011-07-30T18:08:53Z

<p>Spanther: Created page with &quot;{{Summary |title=Crisis in the Humanities |authors=Marjorie, Perloff |url=http://epc.buffalo.edu/authors/perloff/articles/crisis.html |tags=education, humanities, literature |sum...&quot;</p> <hr /> <div>{{Summary<br /> |title=Crisis in the Humanities<br /> |authors=Marjorie, Perloff<br /> |url=http://epc.buffalo.edu/authors/perloff/articles/crisis.html<br /> |tags=education, humanities, literature<br /> |summary=In this paper, Marjorie Perloff, professor emeritus at Stanford, responds to an ongoing problem within Humanities departments: being attacked as irrelevant by other disciplines and failing to provide pragmatic training for its PHD students. In a section titled &quot;What are the Humanities?&quot;, Perloff posits the difficulty of various institutions to agree on a definition of and role for the Humanities as the crux of the problem. As a response, she outlines the lineage of literature/poetics (due to it being &quot;one of the central branches of the Humanities”) by defining its role and exhaustively tracing its heterogeneous components (rhetoric, in particular) through such diverse thinkers as Plato and Aristotle to Wittgenstein and Adorno. The real crisis, Perloff suggests, is literature's literal loss of being studied in and of itself. Rather than the usual ontological treatment other disciplines reserve for their own subjects/objects of study, Perloff points to a trend within the Humanities that uses art and literature as &quot;merely a conduit for meaning above and beyond it.&quot; Here, cultural and critical studies are condemned for relegating literary works as a merely a means to prop up various historical and cultural theories as opposed to appreciating them on their own grounds, as an end in and of themselves. Perloff concludes by prompting a return to &quot;more knowledge of actual art works and a great emphasis on induction&quot; as one way to preserve the Humanities and its resources. But she also points to a continuous trend of re-engagement with art and literature in popular culture (e.g. The Futururists and Marcel Proust) as a sign that the Humanities aren't about to disappear anytime soon, and concludes on a positive note asserting the inevitability of the Humanities to survive due to the nature of its origins and pleasure of its products.<br /> |relevance=In the sea of published material surrounding the &quot;Humanities crisis,&quot; this treatise serves as a sophisticated and articulate response in an otherwise confusing and contradictory terrain. Perloff is a definitive voice of authority in the Humanities, as such, this paper serves as a great starting point for anyone interested in wanting to make sense of the murky waters currently surrounding the confused discipline. <br /> |journal=Chapter 1 from Differentials: Poetry, Poetics, Pedagogy<br /> |pub_date=2004/09/26<br /> |subject=Education<br /> }}</div>

Spanther https://acawiki.org/index.php?title=AcaWiki:Top_100_Papers&diff=5896 2011-07-29T06:03:31Z

<p>Spanther: /* Crisis in the Humanities */</p> <hr /> <div>We are driving towards gathering summaries of the Top 100 academic papers in the world. This is a large effort to increase the number of our papers, get more students, more researchers, and academics to know about the project and share their specific knowledge. We need your specific expertise to make this project sucessful. <br /> <br /> {{RightTOCLevels|limit=2}}<br /> <br /> = HOWTO =<br /> <br /> The [https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=28656 original idea came from the community].<br /> <br /> To make this work we need to:<br /> <br /> * (DONE) Create a list of the Top 20 Domains<br /> * [[Help:Editing|Help edit this wiki]] (its open for you to help with!)<br /> * Create sources per domain where to pull from.<br /> * Develop leaders per domain<br /> * Get at least 5 papers per domain<br /> ** Think that another paper is more important than the 5 already listed? [[Special:AddData/Summary|Summarize it]] and add it to the list!<br /> <br /> = Additional Resources =<br /> <br /> * [http://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/1168/what-papers-should-everyone-read What papers should everyone read?] - Theoretical Computer Science<br /> <br /> * [http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/10/09/1065676090723.html The five most cited papers]<br /> <br /> * [http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/stats/articles Most Cited Computer Science Articles]<br /> <br /> * [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_important_publications_in_computer_science List of important publications in computer science]<br /> <br /> * [http://in-cites.com/nobel/index.html The 100 Most-Cited Scientists]<br /> <br /> * [http://isihighlycited.com/ ISIHighlyCited.com]<br /> <br /> * [http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/story.asp?storyCode=405956&amp;sectioncode=26 Most cited authors of books in the humanities, 2007]<br /> <br /> * [http://archive.sciencewatch.com/sept-oct2003/sw_sept-oct2003_page2.htm Most-Cited Researchers, 1983-2002]<br /> <br /> * [http://repec.org/ Research Papers in Economics]<br /> <br /> * [http://www.harzing.com/pp_gs.htm Google Scholar - a new data source for citation analysis]<br /> <br /> * [http://wokinfo.com/products_tools/analytical/jcr/ Journal Citation Reports]<br /> <br /> * [http://www.librijournal.org/pdf/2005-4pp170-180.pdf Google Scholar: The New Generation of Citation Indexes]<br /> <br /> * [http://www.librijournal.org/ International Journal of Libraries and Information Services]<br /> <br /> = Collaboration and Communication =<br /> <br /> ''Please join us in spreading the news about this drive, and join us in chat as well!''<br /> <br /> * Public Social Networks<br /> * [[AcaWiki:Communications|Our Communication Channels]]<br /> <br /> = Top 100 Papers =<br /> <br /> == Anthropology ==<br /> <br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Arts and Literature ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Astronomy ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Biology ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Business ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Chemistry ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Clinical Research ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Computer Science ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Stack Exchange: [http://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/1168/what-papers-should-everyone-read What papers should everyone read?]<br /> ** NB: User contributions on Stack Exchange are licensed under [http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/ cc-wiki] with [http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2009/06/attribution-required/ attribution required]<br /> * Turing Award winners [http://twitter.com/RandomlyWalking/status/82385732467032064 (WP)], including papers they've written and the [http://www.informatik.uni-trier.de/~ley/db/journals/cacm/turing.html Turing Award lectures]<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> =====A mathematical theory of communication=====<br /> <br /> &quot;[http://guohanwei.51.net/code/A%20Mathematical%20Theory%20of%20Communication.pdf A mathematical theory of communication]&quot; by Claude Shannon, classics of information theory. Very readable. ([http://cm.bell-labs.com/cm/ms/what/shannonday/shannon1948.pdf Alternative link].)<br /> <br /> cc-by-sa [http://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/1168/what-papers-should-everyone-read/1172#1172 attribution]<br /> <br /> ===== On Computable Numbers, with an Application to the Entscheidungsproblem =====<br /> <br /> The 1936 paper that arguably started computer science:<br /> <br /> Alan Turing, &quot;[http://scholar.google.com/scholar?cluster=16882511564349146333 On Computable Numbers, with an Application to the Entscheidungsproblem]&quot;, Proceedings of the London Mathematical Society s2-42, 230–265, 1937. [http://dx.doi.org/10.1112/plms/s2-42.1.230 doi: 10.1112/plms/s2-42.1.230]<br /> <br /> In just 36 pages, Turing formulates (but does not name) the Turing Machine, recasts Gödel's famous First Incompleteness Theorem in terms of computation, describes the concept of universality, and in the appendix shows that computability by Turing machines is equivalent to computability by λ-definable functions (as studied by Church and Kleene).<br /> <br /> cc-by-sa [http://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/1168/what-papers-should-everyone-read/1170#1170 attribution]<br /> <br /> ===== Can Programming Be Liberated from the von Neumann Style? =====<br /> <br /> &quot;[http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.72.2622&amp;rep=rep1&amp;type=pdf Can Programming Be Liberated from the von Neumann Style? A Functional Style and Its Algebra of Programs]&quot; by John Backus. This is the 1977 ACM Turing Award Lecture in which Backus introduces functional programming to the world. ACM honored Backus with this award for his seminal work on FORTRAN and for being the B in BNF notation used for describing programming language syntax. I found this work to be really inspiring. It caused me to look at computers and programming languages in a whole new way.<br /> <br /> It also represents the kind of paper I wish there were more of. It exposes the inspiration and thought processing behind a nest of ideas without the rigorous but limiting tone of a research paper. It is a shame that researchers have to wait for an opportunity like the ACM Turing Award to be able to express themselves in this mode. Of course, few researchers can write like John Backus. This papers clarity of vision amazes me.<br /> <br /> cc-by-sa [http://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/1168/what-papers-should-everyone-read/6785#6785 attribution] (comments from Paul Topping)<br /> <br /> == Economics ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Education ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> ** [[User:Viovio]]<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> =====Crisis in the Humanities=====<br /> &quot;[http://epc.buffalo.edu/authors/perloff/articles/crisis.html Crisis in the Humanities]&quot; by Marjorie Perloff.<br /> In this paper, Marjorie Perloff, professor emeritus at Stanford, responds to an ongoing problem within Humanities departments of being attacked as irrelevant by other disciplines and failing to provide pragmatic training for its PHD students. In a section titled &quot;What are the Humanities?&quot;, Perloff posits the difficulty of various institutions to agree on a definition of and role for the Humanities as the crux of the problem. Focusing primarily on literature, due to it being &quot;one of the central branches of the Humanities,&quot; Perloff exhaustively traces its heterogeneous components (rhetoric, in particular) through such diverse thinkers as Plato and Aristotle to Wittgenstein and Adorno, and bemoans literature's literal loss of being studied in and of itself. Rather than receive this ontological treatment, Perloff points to a trend within the Humanities that uses art and literature as &quot;merely a conduit for meaning above and beyond it.&quot; Here, cultural and critical studies are condemned for relegating literary works as a means to prop up various historical and cultural theories as opposed to appreciating them on their own grounds. Perloff urges a return to &quot;more knowledge of actual art works and a great emphasis on induction&quot; as one way to preserve the Humanities and its resources. But she also points to a continuous trend of reengagement with art and literature in popular culture (e.g. The Futururists and Marcel Proust) as a sign that the Humanities aren't about to disappear anytime soon, and concludes on a positive note asserting the inevitability of the Humanities to survive due to the nature of its origins and pleasure of its products. <br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Engineering ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Geosciences ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Health ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Mathematics ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * [http://mathoverflow.net/questions/2144 mathoverflow: A single paper everyone should read?]<br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> ===== The Yang-Mills Equations over Riemann Surfaces ===== <br /> The Yang-Mills Equations over Riemann Surfaces<br /> Author(s): M. F. Atiyah and R. Bott Source: Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series A, Mathematical and Physical Sciences, Vol. 308, No. 1505 (Mar. 17, 1983), pp. 523-615 Published by: The Royal Society [http://www.jstor.org/stable/37156 copy from JSTOR} [http://dx.doi.org/10.1098/rsta.1983.0017 find by DOI]<br /> : One professor called it &quot;the basis for truly 21st century mathematics.&quot; It is also reportedly accessible by beginning graduate students with some exposure to differential geometry and suitable for independent study or as a reading course. It is a 93 page paper and develops a lot of fundamental constructions and ideas from scratch. Here is [http://www.ams.org/mathscinet-getitem?mr=702806 Martin Guest's review on MathSciNet]. -Justin Kerry at [http://mathoverflow.net/questions/2144/a-single-paper-everyone-should-read/15347#15347 cc-by-sa attribution]<br /> : For about 5 years I carried my copy with me everywhere I went, in an increasingly decrepit 3-ring binder weighed down by page after page of my own notes and explanations. One day, at a conference, a dispute arose over whether the main result of the paper held with integral coefficients or required one to work over the rationals. In the flash of an eye, four or five of us pulled out our copies and opened to the relevant page. Luckily, I was right: integral coefficients. The first time I left home without the paper, it felt like a rite of passage. Or at least that's the way I remember it. – Dan Ramras at [http://mathoverflow.net/questions/2144/a-single-paper-everyone-should-read/15347#15347 cc-by-sa attribution]<br /> <br /> ===== On formally undecidable propositions of Principia Mathematica and related systems =====<br /> Kurt Gödel's [http://www.csee.wvu.edu/~xinl/library/papers/math/Godel.pdf On formally undecidable propositions of Principia Mathematica and related systems]. See [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_Formally_Undecidable_Propositions_of_Principia_Mathematica_and_Related_Systems its Wikipedia article]<br /> <br /> cc-by-sa [http://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/1168/what-papers-should-everyone-read/2218#2218 attribution]<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Medicine ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Neuroscience ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Philosophy ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Physics ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> * Posting a question at [http://physicsoverflow.com/ Physics Overflow] might yield some interesting responses<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> =====The Unreasonable Effectiveness of Mathematics in the Natural Sciences=====<br /> [http://www.ipod.org.uk/reality/reality_wigner.pdf The Unreasonable Effectiveness of Mathematics in the Natural Sciences by Eugene Wigner]<br /> <br /> [http://mathoverflow.net/questions/2144/a-single-paper-everyone-should-read/43207#43207 cc-by-sa attribution]<br /> <br /> =====Quantum Mechanical Computers=====<br /> <br /> [http://www.springerlink.com/content/p1x27746x51x52mm/ Quantum Mechanical Computers (PDF) by Richard Feynman].<br /> <br /> :He introduces the idea of quantum computation, describes quantum circuits, explains how classical circuits can be simulated by quantum circuits, and shows how quantum circuits can compute functions without lots of garbage qubits (using uncomputation).<br /> <br /> :He then shows how any classical circuit can be encoded into a time-independent Hamiltonian! His proof goes through for quantum circuits too, therefore showing that time evolving Hamiltonians is BQP-hard! His Hamiltonian construction is also used in the proof of the quantum version of the Cook-Levin theorem, proved by Kitaev, which shows that k-local Hamiltonian is QMA-complete. cc-by-sa [http://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/1168/what-papers-should-everyone-read/1177#1177 attribution]<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Psychology ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * [http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1698090 &quot;Why Do Humans Reason? Arguments for an Argumentative Theory,&quot;] by Hugo Mercier and Dan Sperber, Behavioral and Brain Sciences, Vol. 34, No. 2, pp. 57-74, 2011<br /> : Jonathan Haidt [http://edge.org/conversation/the-argumentative-theory said] &quot;so important that the abstracts... should be posted in psychology departments all over the country.&quot; and that “the article is one of my favorite papers of the last ten years. I believe that they have solved one of the most important and longstanding puzzles in psychology: why are we so good at reasoning in some cases, but so hopelessly biased in others?<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Sociology ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Sociology Papers ====<br /> Sociology is a big field with many branches (e.g. network research, health communication, media effects, organizational communication, classical sociology, etc.). Perhaps it would be better to make top 5's for each?<br /> <br /> * Bowker, G. C., &amp; Star, S. L. (1999). [[Sorting things out: Classification and its consequences]]. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. <br /> * Granovetter, M. (1983). &quot;[[The strength of weak ties: A network theory revisited]]&quot;. Sociological Theory 1: 201–233. doi:[http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/202051 10.2307/202051]. JSTOR 202051.<br /> * Watts, D. J. (2004). [[The new science of networks]]. Annual Review of Sociology, 30(1), 243-270. DOI:[http://dx.doi.org/10.1146/annurev.soc.30.020404.104342 10.1146/annurev.soc.30.020404.104342], see also [http://enwp.org/Mark_Granovetter#The_strength_of_weak_ties]<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> <br /> [[Category:Activity]]</div>

Spanther https://acawiki.org/index.php?title=AcaWiki:Top_100_Papers&diff=5895 2011-07-29T05:59:48Z

<p>Spanther: /* Crisis in the Humanities */</p> <hr /> <div>We are driving towards gathering summaries of the Top 100 academic papers in the world. This is a large effort to increase the number of our papers, get more students, more researchers, and academics to know about the project and share their specific knowledge. We need your specific expertise to make this project sucessful. <br /> <br /> {{RightTOCLevels|limit=2}}<br /> <br /> = HOWTO =<br /> <br /> The [https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=28656 original idea came from the community].<br /> <br /> To make this work we need to:<br /> <br /> * (DONE) Create a list of the Top 20 Domains<br /> * [[Help:Editing|Help edit this wiki]] (its open for you to help with!)<br /> * Create sources per domain where to pull from.<br /> * Develop leaders per domain<br /> * Get at least 5 papers per domain<br /> ** Think that another paper is more important than the 5 already listed? [[Special:AddData/Summary|Summarize it]] and add it to the list!<br /> <br /> = Additional Resources =<br /> <br /> * [http://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/1168/what-papers-should-everyone-read What papers should everyone read?] - Theoretical Computer Science<br /> <br /> * [http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/10/09/1065676090723.html The five most cited papers]<br /> <br /> * [http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/stats/articles Most Cited Computer Science Articles]<br /> <br /> * [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_important_publications_in_computer_science List of important publications in computer science]<br /> <br /> * [http://in-cites.com/nobel/index.html The 100 Most-Cited Scientists]<br /> <br /> * [http://isihighlycited.com/ ISIHighlyCited.com]<br /> <br /> * [http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/story.asp?storyCode=405956&amp;sectioncode=26 Most cited authors of books in the humanities, 2007]<br /> <br /> * [http://archive.sciencewatch.com/sept-oct2003/sw_sept-oct2003_page2.htm Most-Cited Researchers, 1983-2002]<br /> <br /> * [http://repec.org/ Research Papers in Economics]<br /> <br /> * [http://www.harzing.com/pp_gs.htm Google Scholar - a new data source for citation analysis]<br /> <br /> * [http://wokinfo.com/products_tools/analytical/jcr/ Journal Citation Reports]<br /> <br /> * [http://www.librijournal.org/pdf/2005-4pp170-180.pdf Google Scholar: The New Generation of Citation Indexes]<br /> <br /> * [http://www.librijournal.org/ International Journal of Libraries and Information Services]<br /> <br /> = Collaboration and Communication =<br /> <br /> ''Please join us in spreading the news about this drive, and join us in chat as well!''<br /> <br /> * Public Social Networks<br /> * [[AcaWiki:Communications|Our Communication Channels]]<br /> <br /> = Top 100 Papers =<br /> <br /> == Anthropology ==<br /> <br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Arts and Literature ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Astronomy ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Biology ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Business ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Chemistry ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Clinical Research ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Computer Science ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Stack Exchange: [http://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/1168/what-papers-should-everyone-read What papers should everyone read?]<br /> ** NB: User contributions on Stack Exchange are licensed under [http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/ cc-wiki] with [http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2009/06/attribution-required/ attribution required]<br /> * Turing Award winners [http://twitter.com/RandomlyWalking/status/82385732467032064 (WP)], including papers they've written and the [http://www.informatik.uni-trier.de/~ley/db/journals/cacm/turing.html Turing Award lectures]<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> =====A mathematical theory of communication=====<br /> <br /> &quot;[http://guohanwei.51.net/code/A%20Mathematical%20Theory%20of%20Communication.pdf A mathematical theory of communication]&quot; by Claude Shannon, classics of information theory. Very readable. ([http://cm.bell-labs.com/cm/ms/what/shannonday/shannon1948.pdf Alternative link].)<br /> <br /> cc-by-sa [http://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/1168/what-papers-should-everyone-read/1172#1172 attribution]<br /> <br /> ===== On Computable Numbers, with an Application to the Entscheidungsproblem =====<br /> <br /> The 1936 paper that arguably started computer science:<br /> <br /> Alan Turing, &quot;[http://scholar.google.com/scholar?cluster=16882511564349146333 On Computable Numbers, with an Application to the Entscheidungsproblem]&quot;, Proceedings of the London Mathematical Society s2-42, 230–265, 1937. [http://dx.doi.org/10.1112/plms/s2-42.1.230 doi: 10.1112/plms/s2-42.1.230]<br /> <br /> In just 36 pages, Turing formulates (but does not name) the Turing Machine, recasts Gödel's famous First Incompleteness Theorem in terms of computation, describes the concept of universality, and in the appendix shows that computability by Turing machines is equivalent to computability by λ-definable functions (as studied by Church and Kleene).<br /> <br /> cc-by-sa [http://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/1168/what-papers-should-everyone-read/1170#1170 attribution]<br /> <br /> ===== Can Programming Be Liberated from the von Neumann Style? =====<br /> <br /> &quot;[http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.72.2622&amp;rep=rep1&amp;type=pdf Can Programming Be Liberated from the von Neumann Style? A Functional Style and Its Algebra of Programs]&quot; by John Backus. This is the 1977 ACM Turing Award Lecture in which Backus introduces functional programming to the world. ACM honored Backus with this award for his seminal work on FORTRAN and for being the B in BNF notation used for describing programming language syntax. I found this work to be really inspiring. It caused me to look at computers and programming languages in a whole new way.<br /> <br /> It also represents the kind of paper I wish there were more of. It exposes the inspiration and thought processing behind a nest of ideas without the rigorous but limiting tone of a research paper. It is a shame that researchers have to wait for an opportunity like the ACM Turing Award to be able to express themselves in this mode. Of course, few researchers can write like John Backus. This papers clarity of vision amazes me.<br /> <br /> cc-by-sa [http://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/1168/what-papers-should-everyone-read/6785#6785 attribution] (comments from Paul Topping)<br /> <br /> == Economics ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Education ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> ** [[User:Viovio]]<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> =====Crisis in the Humanities=====<br /> &quot;[http://epc.buffalo.edu/authors/perloff/articles/crisis.html Crisis in the Humanities]&quot; by Marjorie Perloff.<br /> In this paper, Marjorie Perloff, professor emeritus at Stanford, responds to an ongoing problem within Humanities departments of being attacked as irrelevant by other disciplines and failing to provide pragmatic training for its PHD students. In a section titled &quot;What are the Humanities?&quot;, Perloff posits the difficulty of various institutions to agree on a definition of and role for the Humanities as the crux of the problem. Focusing primarily on literature, due to it being &quot;one of the central branches of the Humanities,&quot; Perloff exhaustively traces its heterogeneous components (rhetoric in particular) through such diverse thinkers as Plato and Aristotle to Wittgenstein and Adorno, and bemoans literature's literal loss of being studied in and of itself. Rather than receiving its ontological treatment, Perloff points to a trend within the Humanities that uses art and literature as &quot;merely a conduit for meaning above and beyond it.&quot; Here, cultural and critical studies are condemned for relegating literary works as a means to prop up various historical and cultural theories as opposed to appreciating them on their own grounds. Perloff urges a return to &quot;more knowledge of actual art works and a great emphasis on induction&quot; as one way to preserve the Humanities and its resources. But she also points to a continuous reengagement with art and literature (e.g. The Futururists and Marcel Proust) as a sign that the Humanities aren't about to disappear anytime soon, and concludes on a positive note asserting the inevitability of the Humanities to survive due to the nature of its origins. <br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Engineering ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Geosciences ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Health ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Mathematics ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * [http://mathoverflow.net/questions/2144 mathoverflow: A single paper everyone should read?]<br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> ===== The Yang-Mills Equations over Riemann Surfaces ===== <br /> The Yang-Mills Equations over Riemann Surfaces<br /> Author(s): M. F. Atiyah and R. Bott Source: Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series A, Mathematical and Physical Sciences, Vol. 308, No. 1505 (Mar. 17, 1983), pp. 523-615 Published by: The Royal Society [http://www.jstor.org/stable/37156 copy from JSTOR} [http://dx.doi.org/10.1098/rsta.1983.0017 find by DOI]<br /> : One professor called it &quot;the basis for truly 21st century mathematics.&quot; It is also reportedly accessible by beginning graduate students with some exposure to differential geometry and suitable for independent study or as a reading course. It is a 93 page paper and develops a lot of fundamental constructions and ideas from scratch. Here is [http://www.ams.org/mathscinet-getitem?mr=702806 Martin Guest's review on MathSciNet]. -Justin Kerry at [http://mathoverflow.net/questions/2144/a-single-paper-everyone-should-read/15347#15347 cc-by-sa attribution]<br /> : For about 5 years I carried my copy with me everywhere I went, in an increasingly decrepit 3-ring binder weighed down by page after page of my own notes and explanations. One day, at a conference, a dispute arose over whether the main result of the paper held with integral coefficients or required one to work over the rationals. In the flash of an eye, four or five of us pulled out our copies and opened to the relevant page. Luckily, I was right: integral coefficients. The first time I left home without the paper, it felt like a rite of passage. Or at least that's the way I remember it. – Dan Ramras at [http://mathoverflow.net/questions/2144/a-single-paper-everyone-should-read/15347#15347 cc-by-sa attribution]<br /> <br /> ===== On formally undecidable propositions of Principia Mathematica and related systems =====<br /> Kurt Gödel's [http://www.csee.wvu.edu/~xinl/library/papers/math/Godel.pdf On formally undecidable propositions of Principia Mathematica and related systems]. See [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_Formally_Undecidable_Propositions_of_Principia_Mathematica_and_Related_Systems its Wikipedia article]<br /> <br /> cc-by-sa [http://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/1168/what-papers-should-everyone-read/2218#2218 attribution]<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Medicine ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Neuroscience ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Philosophy ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Physics ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> * Posting a question at [http://physicsoverflow.com/ Physics Overflow] might yield some interesting responses<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> =====The Unreasonable Effectiveness of Mathematics in the Natural Sciences=====<br /> [http://www.ipod.org.uk/reality/reality_wigner.pdf The Unreasonable Effectiveness of Mathematics in the Natural Sciences by Eugene Wigner]<br /> <br /> [http://mathoverflow.net/questions/2144/a-single-paper-everyone-should-read/43207#43207 cc-by-sa attribution]<br /> <br /> =====Quantum Mechanical Computers=====<br /> <br /> [http://www.springerlink.com/content/p1x27746x51x52mm/ Quantum Mechanical Computers (PDF) by Richard Feynman].<br /> <br /> :He introduces the idea of quantum computation, describes quantum circuits, explains how classical circuits can be simulated by quantum circuits, and shows how quantum circuits can compute functions without lots of garbage qubits (using uncomputation).<br /> <br /> :He then shows how any classical circuit can be encoded into a time-independent Hamiltonian! His proof goes through for quantum circuits too, therefore showing that time evolving Hamiltonians is BQP-hard! His Hamiltonian construction is also used in the proof of the quantum version of the Cook-Levin theorem, proved by Kitaev, which shows that k-local Hamiltonian is QMA-complete. cc-by-sa [http://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/1168/what-papers-should-everyone-read/1177#1177 attribution]<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Psychology ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * [http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1698090 &quot;Why Do Humans Reason? Arguments for an Argumentative Theory,&quot;] by Hugo Mercier and Dan Sperber, Behavioral and Brain Sciences, Vol. 34, No. 2, pp. 57-74, 2011<br /> : Jonathan Haidt [http://edge.org/conversation/the-argumentative-theory said] &quot;so important that the abstracts... should be posted in psychology departments all over the country.&quot; and that “the article is one of my favorite papers of the last ten years. I believe that they have solved one of the most important and longstanding puzzles in psychology: why are we so good at reasoning in some cases, but so hopelessly biased in others?<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Sociology ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Sociology Papers ====<br /> Sociology is a big field with many branches (e.g. network research, health communication, media effects, organizational communication, classical sociology, etc.). Perhaps it would be better to make top 5's for each?<br /> <br /> * Bowker, G. C., &amp; Star, S. L. (1999). [[Sorting things out: Classification and its consequences]]. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. <br /> * Granovetter, M. (1983). &quot;[[The strength of weak ties: A network theory revisited]]&quot;. Sociological Theory 1: 201–233. doi:[http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/202051 10.2307/202051]. JSTOR 202051.<br /> * Watts, D. J. (2004). [[The new science of networks]]. Annual Review of Sociology, 30(1), 243-270. DOI:[http://dx.doi.org/10.1146/annurev.soc.30.020404.104342 10.1146/annurev.soc.30.020404.104342], see also [http://enwp.org/Mark_Granovetter#The_strength_of_weak_ties]<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> <br /> [[Category:Activity]]</div>

Spanther https://acawiki.org/index.php?title=AcaWiki:Top_100_Papers&diff=5894 2011-07-29T05:58:58Z

<p>Spanther: /* Crisis in the Humanities */</p> <hr /> <div>We are driving towards gathering summaries of the Top 100 academic papers in the world. This is a large effort to increase the number of our papers, get more students, more researchers, and academics to know about the project and share their specific knowledge. We need your specific expertise to make this project sucessful. <br /> <br /> {{RightTOCLevels|limit=2}}<br /> <br /> = HOWTO =<br /> <br /> The [https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=28656 original idea came from the community].<br /> <br /> To make this work we need to:<br /> <br /> * (DONE) Create a list of the Top 20 Domains<br /> * [[Help:Editing|Help edit this wiki]] (its open for you to help with!)<br /> * Create sources per domain where to pull from.<br /> * Develop leaders per domain<br /> * Get at least 5 papers per domain<br /> ** Think that another paper is more important than the 5 already listed? [[Special:AddData/Summary|Summarize it]] and add it to the list!<br /> <br /> = Additional Resources =<br /> <br /> * [http://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/1168/what-papers-should-everyone-read What papers should everyone read?] - Theoretical Computer Science<br /> <br /> * [http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/10/09/1065676090723.html The five most cited papers]<br /> <br /> * [http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/stats/articles Most Cited Computer Science Articles]<br /> <br /> * [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_important_publications_in_computer_science List of important publications in computer science]<br /> <br /> * [http://in-cites.com/nobel/index.html The 100 Most-Cited Scientists]<br /> <br /> * [http://isihighlycited.com/ ISIHighlyCited.com]<br /> <br /> * [http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/story.asp?storyCode=405956&amp;sectioncode=26 Most cited authors of books in the humanities, 2007]<br /> <br /> * [http://archive.sciencewatch.com/sept-oct2003/sw_sept-oct2003_page2.htm Most-Cited Researchers, 1983-2002]<br /> <br /> * [http://repec.org/ Research Papers in Economics]<br /> <br /> * [http://www.harzing.com/pp_gs.htm Google Scholar - a new data source for citation analysis]<br /> <br /> * [http://wokinfo.com/products_tools/analytical/jcr/ Journal Citation Reports]<br /> <br /> * [http://www.librijournal.org/pdf/2005-4pp170-180.pdf Google Scholar: The New Generation of Citation Indexes]<br /> <br /> * [http://www.librijournal.org/ International Journal of Libraries and Information Services]<br /> <br /> = Collaboration and Communication =<br /> <br /> ''Please join us in spreading the news about this drive, and join us in chat as well!''<br /> <br /> * Public Social Networks<br /> * [[AcaWiki:Communications|Our Communication Channels]]<br /> <br /> = Top 100 Papers =<br /> <br /> == Anthropology ==<br /> <br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Arts and Literature ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Astronomy ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Biology ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Business ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Chemistry ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Clinical Research ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Computer Science ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Stack Exchange: [http://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/1168/what-papers-should-everyone-read What papers should everyone read?]<br /> ** NB: User contributions on Stack Exchange are licensed under [http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/ cc-wiki] with [http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2009/06/attribution-required/ attribution required]<br /> * Turing Award winners [http://twitter.com/RandomlyWalking/status/82385732467032064 (WP)], including papers they've written and the [http://www.informatik.uni-trier.de/~ley/db/journals/cacm/turing.html Turing Award lectures]<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> =====A mathematical theory of communication=====<br /> <br /> &quot;[http://guohanwei.51.net/code/A%20Mathematical%20Theory%20of%20Communication.pdf A mathematical theory of communication]&quot; by Claude Shannon, classics of information theory. Very readable. ([http://cm.bell-labs.com/cm/ms/what/shannonday/shannon1948.pdf Alternative link].)<br /> <br /> cc-by-sa [http://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/1168/what-papers-should-everyone-read/1172#1172 attribution]<br /> <br /> ===== On Computable Numbers, with an Application to the Entscheidungsproblem =====<br /> <br /> The 1936 paper that arguably started computer science:<br /> <br /> Alan Turing, &quot;[http://scholar.google.com/scholar?cluster=16882511564349146333 On Computable Numbers, with an Application to the Entscheidungsproblem]&quot;, Proceedings of the London Mathematical Society s2-42, 230–265, 1937. [http://dx.doi.org/10.1112/plms/s2-42.1.230 doi: 10.1112/plms/s2-42.1.230]<br /> <br /> In just 36 pages, Turing formulates (but does not name) the Turing Machine, recasts Gödel's famous First Incompleteness Theorem in terms of computation, describes the concept of universality, and in the appendix shows that computability by Turing machines is equivalent to computability by λ-definable functions (as studied by Church and Kleene).<br /> <br /> cc-by-sa [http://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/1168/what-papers-should-everyone-read/1170#1170 attribution]<br /> <br /> ===== Can Programming Be Liberated from the von Neumann Style? =====<br /> <br /> &quot;[http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.72.2622&amp;rep=rep1&amp;type=pdf Can Programming Be Liberated from the von Neumann Style? A Functional Style and Its Algebra of Programs]&quot; by John Backus. This is the 1977 ACM Turing Award Lecture in which Backus introduces functional programming to the world. ACM honored Backus with this award for his seminal work on FORTRAN and for being the B in BNF notation used for describing programming language syntax. I found this work to be really inspiring. It caused me to look at computers and programming languages in a whole new way.<br /> <br /> It also represents the kind of paper I wish there were more of. It exposes the inspiration and thought processing behind a nest of ideas without the rigorous but limiting tone of a research paper. It is a shame that researchers have to wait for an opportunity like the ACM Turing Award to be able to express themselves in this mode. Of course, few researchers can write like John Backus. This papers clarity of vision amazes me.<br /> <br /> cc-by-sa [http://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/1168/what-papers-should-everyone-read/6785#6785 attribution] (comments from Paul Topping)<br /> <br /> == Economics ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Education ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> ** [[User:Viovio]]<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> =====Crisis in the Humanities=====<br /> &quot;[http://epc.buffalo.edu/authors/perloff/articles/crisis.html Crisis in the Humanities]&quot; by Marjorie Perloff<br /> In this paper, Marjorie Perloff, professor emeritus at Stanford, responds to an ongoing problem within Humanities departments of being attacked as irrelevant by other disciplines and failing to provide pragmatic training for its PHD students. In a section titled &quot;What are the Humanities?&quot;, Perloff posits the difficulty of various institutions to agree on a definition of and role for the Humanities as the crux of the problem. Focusing primarily on literature, due to it being &quot;one of the central branches of the Humanities,&quot; Perloff exhaustively traces its heterogeneous components (rhetoric in particular) through such diverse thinkers as Plato and Aristotle to Wittgenstein and Adorno, and bemoans literature's literal loss of being studied in and of itself. Rather than receiving its ontological treatment, Perloff points to a trend within the Humanities that uses art and literature as &quot;merely a conduit for meaning above and beyond it.&quot; Here, cultural and critical studies are condemned for relegating literary works as a means to prop up various historical and cultural theories as opposed to appreciating them on their own grounds. Perloff urges a return to &quot;more knowledge of actual art works and a great emphasis on induction&quot; as one way to preserve the Humanities and its resources. But she also points to a continuous reengagement with art and literature (e.g. The Futururists and Marcel Proust) as a sign that the Humanities aren't about to disappear anytime soon, and concludes on a positive note asserting the inevitability of the Humanities to survive due to the nature of its origins. <br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Engineering ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Geosciences ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Health ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Mathematics ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * [http://mathoverflow.net/questions/2144 mathoverflow: A single paper everyone should read?]<br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> ===== The Yang-Mills Equations over Riemann Surfaces ===== <br /> The Yang-Mills Equations over Riemann Surfaces<br /> Author(s): M. F. Atiyah and R. Bott Source: Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series A, Mathematical and Physical Sciences, Vol. 308, No. 1505 (Mar. 17, 1983), pp. 523-615 Published by: The Royal Society [http://www.jstor.org/stable/37156 copy from JSTOR} [http://dx.doi.org/10.1098/rsta.1983.0017 find by DOI]<br /> : One professor called it &quot;the basis for truly 21st century mathematics.&quot; It is also reportedly accessible by beginning graduate students with some exposure to differential geometry and suitable for independent study or as a reading course. It is a 93 page paper and develops a lot of fundamental constructions and ideas from scratch. Here is [http://www.ams.org/mathscinet-getitem?mr=702806 Martin Guest's review on MathSciNet]. -Justin Kerry at [http://mathoverflow.net/questions/2144/a-single-paper-everyone-should-read/15347#15347 cc-by-sa attribution]<br /> : For about 5 years I carried my copy with me everywhere I went, in an increasingly decrepit 3-ring binder weighed down by page after page of my own notes and explanations. One day, at a conference, a dispute arose over whether the main result of the paper held with integral coefficients or required one to work over the rationals. In the flash of an eye, four or five of us pulled out our copies and opened to the relevant page. Luckily, I was right: integral coefficients. The first time I left home without the paper, it felt like a rite of passage. Or at least that's the way I remember it. – Dan Ramras at [http://mathoverflow.net/questions/2144/a-single-paper-everyone-should-read/15347#15347 cc-by-sa attribution]<br /> <br /> ===== On formally undecidable propositions of Principia Mathematica and related systems =====<br /> Kurt Gödel's [http://www.csee.wvu.edu/~xinl/library/papers/math/Godel.pdf On formally undecidable propositions of Principia Mathematica and related systems]. See [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_Formally_Undecidable_Propositions_of_Principia_Mathematica_and_Related_Systems its Wikipedia article]<br /> <br /> cc-by-sa [http://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/1168/what-papers-should-everyone-read/2218#2218 attribution]<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Medicine ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Neuroscience ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Philosophy ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Physics ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> * Posting a question at [http://physicsoverflow.com/ Physics Overflow] might yield some interesting responses<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> =====The Unreasonable Effectiveness of Mathematics in the Natural Sciences=====<br /> [http://www.ipod.org.uk/reality/reality_wigner.pdf The Unreasonable Effectiveness of Mathematics in the Natural Sciences by Eugene Wigner]<br /> <br /> [http://mathoverflow.net/questions/2144/a-single-paper-everyone-should-read/43207#43207 cc-by-sa attribution]<br /> <br /> =====Quantum Mechanical Computers=====<br /> <br /> [http://www.springerlink.com/content/p1x27746x51x52mm/ Quantum Mechanical Computers (PDF) by Richard Feynman].<br /> <br /> :He introduces the idea of quantum computation, describes quantum circuits, explains how classical circuits can be simulated by quantum circuits, and shows how quantum circuits can compute functions without lots of garbage qubits (using uncomputation).<br /> <br /> :He then shows how any classical circuit can be encoded into a time-independent Hamiltonian! His proof goes through for quantum circuits too, therefore showing that time evolving Hamiltonians is BQP-hard! His Hamiltonian construction is also used in the proof of the quantum version of the Cook-Levin theorem, proved by Kitaev, which shows that k-local Hamiltonian is QMA-complete. cc-by-sa [http://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/1168/what-papers-should-everyone-read/1177#1177 attribution]<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Psychology ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * [http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1698090 &quot;Why Do Humans Reason? Arguments for an Argumentative Theory,&quot;] by Hugo Mercier and Dan Sperber, Behavioral and Brain Sciences, Vol. 34, No. 2, pp. 57-74, 2011<br /> : Jonathan Haidt [http://edge.org/conversation/the-argumentative-theory said] &quot;so important that the abstracts... should be posted in psychology departments all over the country.&quot; and that “the article is one of my favorite papers of the last ten years. I believe that they have solved one of the most important and longstanding puzzles in psychology: why are we so good at reasoning in some cases, but so hopelessly biased in others?<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Sociology ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Sociology Papers ====<br /> Sociology is a big field with many branches (e.g. network research, health communication, media effects, organizational communication, classical sociology, etc.). Perhaps it would be better to make top 5's for each?<br /> <br /> * Bowker, G. C., &amp; Star, S. L. (1999). [[Sorting things out: Classification and its consequences]]. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. <br /> * Granovetter, M. (1983). &quot;[[The strength of weak ties: A network theory revisited]]&quot;. Sociological Theory 1: 201–233. doi:[http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/202051 10.2307/202051]. JSTOR 202051.<br /> * Watts, D. J. (2004). [[The new science of networks]]. Annual Review of Sociology, 30(1), 243-270. DOI:[http://dx.doi.org/10.1146/annurev.soc.30.020404.104342 10.1146/annurev.soc.30.020404.104342], see also [http://enwp.org/Mark_Granovetter#The_strength_of_weak_ties]<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> <br /> [[Category:Activity]]</div>

Spanther https://acawiki.org/index.php?title=AcaWiki:Top_100_Papers&diff=5885 2011-07-29T03:04:03Z

<p>Spanther: /* Crisis in the Humanities */</p> <hr /> <div>We are driving towards gathering summaries of the Top 100 academic papers in the world. This is a large effort to increase the number of our papers, get more students, more researchers, and academics to know about the project and share their specific knowledge. We need your specific expertise to make this project sucessful. <br /> <br /> {{RightTOCLevels|limit=2}}<br /> <br /> = HOWTO =<br /> <br /> The [https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=28656 original idea came from the community].<br /> <br /> To make this work we need to:<br /> <br /> * (DONE) Create a list of the Top 20 Domains<br /> * [[Help:Editing|Help edit this wiki]] (its open for you to help with!)<br /> * Create sources per domain where to pull from.<br /> * Develop leaders per domain<br /> * Get at least 5 papers per domain<br /> ** Think that another paper is more important than the 5 already listed? [[Special:AddData/Summary|Summarize it]] and add it to the list!<br /> <br /> = Additional Resources =<br /> <br /> * [http://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/1168/what-papers-should-everyone-read What papers should everyone read?] - Theoretical Computer Science<br /> <br /> * [http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/10/09/1065676090723.html The five most cited papers]<br /> <br /> * [http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/stats/articles Most Cited Computer Science Articles]<br /> <br /> * [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_important_publications_in_computer_science List of important publications in computer science]<br /> <br /> * [http://in-cites.com/nobel/index.html The 100 Most-Cited Scientists]<br /> <br /> * [http://isihighlycited.com/ ISIHighlyCited.com]<br /> <br /> * [http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/story.asp?storyCode=405956&amp;sectioncode=26 Most cited authors of books in the humanities, 2007]<br /> <br /> * [http://archive.sciencewatch.com/sept-oct2003/sw_sept-oct2003_page2.htm Most-Cited Researchers, 1983-2002]<br /> <br /> * [http://repec.org/ Research Papers in Economics]<br /> <br /> * [http://www.harzing.com/pp_gs.htm Google Scholar - a new data source for citation analysis]<br /> <br /> * [http://wokinfo.com/products_tools/analytical/jcr/ Journal Citation Reports]<br /> <br /> * [http://www.librijournal.org/pdf/2005-4pp170-180.pdf Google Scholar: The New Generation of Citation Indexes]<br /> <br /> * [http://www.librijournal.org/ International Journal of Libraries and Information Services]<br /> <br /> = Collaboration and Communication =<br /> <br /> ''Please join us in spreading the news about this drive, and join us in chat as well!''<br /> <br /> * Public Social Networks<br /> * [[AcaWiki:Communications|Our Communication Channels]]<br /> <br /> = Top 100 Papers =<br /> <br /> == Anthropology ==<br /> <br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Arts and Literature ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Astronomy ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Biology ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Business ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Chemistry ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Clinical Research ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Computer Science ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Stack Exchange: [http://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/1168/what-papers-should-everyone-read What papers should everyone read?]<br /> ** NB: User contributions on Stack Exchange are licensed under [http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/ cc-wiki] with [http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2009/06/attribution-required/ attribution required]<br /> * Turing Award winners [http://twitter.com/RandomlyWalking/status/82385732467032064 (WP)], including papers they've written and the [http://www.informatik.uni-trier.de/~ley/db/journals/cacm/turing.html Turing Award lectures]<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> =====A mathematical theory of communication=====<br /> <br /> &quot;[http://guohanwei.51.net/code/A%20Mathematical%20Theory%20of%20Communication.pdf A mathematical theory of communication]&quot; by Claude Shannon, classics of information theory. Very readable. ([http://cm.bell-labs.com/cm/ms/what/shannonday/shannon1948.pdf Alternative link].)<br /> <br /> cc-by-sa [http://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/1168/what-papers-should-everyone-read/1172#1172 attribution]<br /> <br /> ===== On Computable Numbers, with an Application to the Entscheidungsproblem =====<br /> <br /> The 1936 paper that arguably started computer science:<br /> <br /> Alan Turing, &quot;[http://scholar.google.com/scholar?cluster=16882511564349146333 On Computable Numbers, with an Application to the Entscheidungsproblem]&quot;, Proceedings of the London Mathematical Society s2-42, 230–265, 1937. [http://dx.doi.org/10.1112/plms/s2-42.1.230 doi: 10.1112/plms/s2-42.1.230]<br /> <br /> In just 36 pages, Turing formulates (but does not name) the Turing Machine, recasts Gödel's famous First Incompleteness Theorem in terms of computation, describes the concept of universality, and in the appendix shows that computability by Turing machines is equivalent to computability by λ-definable functions (as studied by Church and Kleene).<br /> <br /> cc-by-sa [http://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/1168/what-papers-should-everyone-read/1170#1170 attribution]<br /> <br /> ===== Can Programming Be Liberated from the von Neumann Style? =====<br /> <br /> &quot;[http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.72.2622&amp;rep=rep1&amp;type=pdf Can Programming Be Liberated from the von Neumann Style? A Functional Style and Its Algebra of Programs]&quot; by John Backus. This is the 1977 ACM Turing Award Lecture in which Backus introduces functional programming to the world. ACM honored Backus with this award for his seminal work on FORTRAN and for being the B in BNF notation used for describing programming language syntax. I found this work to be really inspiring. It caused me to look at computers and programming languages in a whole new way.<br /> <br /> It also represents the kind of paper I wish there were more of. It exposes the inspiration and thought processing behind a nest of ideas without the rigorous but limiting tone of a research paper. It is a shame that researchers have to wait for an opportunity like the ACM Turing Award to be able to express themselves in this mode. Of course, few researchers can write like John Backus. This papers clarity of vision amazes me.<br /> <br /> cc-by-sa [http://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/1168/what-papers-should-everyone-read/6785#6785 attribution] (comments from Paul Topping)<br /> <br /> == Economics ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Education ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> ** [[User:Viovio]]<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> =====Crisis in the Humanities=====<br /> &quot;[http://epc.buffalo.edu/authors/perloff/articles/crisis.html Crisis in the Humanities]&quot; by Marjorie Perloff<br /> <br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Engineering ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Geosciences ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Health ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Mathematics ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * [http://mathoverflow.net/questions/2144 mathoverflow: A single paper everyone should read?]<br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> ===== The Yang-Mills Equations over Riemann Surfaces ===== <br /> The Yang-Mills Equations over Riemann Surfaces<br /> Author(s): M. F. Atiyah and R. Bott Source: Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series A, Mathematical and Physical Sciences, Vol. 308, No. 1505 (Mar. 17, 1983), pp. 523-615 Published by: The Royal Society [http://www.jstor.org/stable/37156 copy from JSTOR} [http://dx.doi.org/10.1098/rsta.1983.0017 find by DOI]<br /> : One professor called it &quot;the basis for truly 21st century mathematics.&quot; It is also reportedly accessible by beginning graduate students with some exposure to differential geometry and suitable for independent study or as a reading course. It is a 93 page paper and develops a lot of fundamental constructions and ideas from scratch. Here is [http://www.ams.org/mathscinet-getitem?mr=702806 Martin Guest's review on MathSciNet]. -Justin Kerry at [http://mathoverflow.net/questions/2144/a-single-paper-everyone-should-read/15347#15347 cc-by-sa attribution]<br /> : For about 5 years I carried my copy with me everywhere I went, in an increasingly decrepit 3-ring binder weighed down by page after page of my own notes and explanations. One day, at a conference, a dispute arose over whether the main result of the paper held with integral coefficients or required one to work over the rationals. In the flash of an eye, four or five of us pulled out our copies and opened to the relevant page. Luckily, I was right: integral coefficients. The first time I left home without the paper, it felt like a rite of passage. Or at least that's the way I remember it. – Dan Ramras at [http://mathoverflow.net/questions/2144/a-single-paper-everyone-should-read/15347#15347 cc-by-sa attribution]<br /> <br /> ===== On formally undecidable propositions of Principia Mathematica and related systems =====<br /> Kurt Gödel's [http://www.csee.wvu.edu/~xinl/library/papers/math/Godel.pdf On formally undecidable propositions of Principia Mathematica and related systems]. See [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_Formally_Undecidable_Propositions_of_Principia_Mathematica_and_Related_Systems its Wikipedia article]<br /> <br /> cc-by-sa [http://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/1168/what-papers-should-everyone-read/2218#2218 attribution]<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Medicine ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Neuroscience ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Philosophy ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Physics ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> * Posting a question at [http://physicsoverflow.com/ Physics Overflow] might yield some interesting responses<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> =====The Unreasonable Effectiveness of Mathematics in the Natural Sciences=====<br /> [http://www.ipod.org.uk/reality/reality_wigner.pdf The Unreasonable Effectiveness of Mathematics in the Natural Sciences by Eugene Wigner]<br /> <br /> [http://mathoverflow.net/questions/2144/a-single-paper-everyone-should-read/43207#43207 cc-by-sa attribution]<br /> <br /> =====Quantum Mechanical Computers=====<br /> <br /> [http://www.springerlink.com/content/p1x27746x51x52mm/ Quantum Mechanical Computers (PDF) by Richard Feynman].<br /> <br /> :He introduces the idea of quantum computation, describes quantum circuits, explains how classical circuits can be simulated by quantum circuits, and shows how quantum circuits can compute functions without lots of garbage qubits (using uncomputation).<br /> <br /> :He then shows how any classical circuit can be encoded into a time-independent Hamiltonian! His proof goes through for quantum circuits too, therefore showing that time evolving Hamiltonians is BQP-hard! His Hamiltonian construction is also used in the proof of the quantum version of the Cook-Levin theorem, proved by Kitaev, which shows that k-local Hamiltonian is QMA-complete. cc-by-sa [http://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/1168/what-papers-should-everyone-read/1177#1177 attribution]<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Psychology ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * [http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1698090 &quot;Why Do Humans Reason? Arguments for an Argumentative Theory,&quot;] by Hugo Mercier and Dan Sperber, Behavioral and Brain Sciences, Vol. 34, No. 2, pp. 57-74, 2011<br /> : Jonathan Haidt [http://edge.org/conversation/the-argumentative-theory said] &quot;so important that the abstracts... should be posted in psychology departments all over the country.&quot; and that “the article is one of my favorite papers of the last ten years. I believe that they have solved one of the most important and longstanding puzzles in psychology: why are we so good at reasoning in some cases, but so hopelessly biased in others?<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Sociology ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Sociology Papers ====<br /> Sociology is a big field with many branches (e.g. network research, health communication, media effects, organizational communication, classical sociology, etc.). Perhaps it would be better to make top 5's for each?<br /> <br /> * Bowker, G. C., &amp; Star, S. L. (1999). [[Sorting things out: Classification and its consequences]]. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. <br /> * Granovetter, M. (1983). &quot;[[The strength of weak ties: A network theory revisited]]&quot;. Sociological Theory 1: 201–233. doi:[http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/202051 10.2307/202051]. JSTOR 202051.<br /> * Watts, D. J. (2004). [[The new science of networks]]. Annual Review of Sociology, 30(1), 243-270. DOI:[http://dx.doi.org/10.1146/annurev.soc.30.020404.104342 10.1146/annurev.soc.30.020404.104342], see also [http://enwp.org/Mark_Granovetter#The_strength_of_weak_ties]<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> <br /> [[Category:Activity]]</div>

Spanther https://acawiki.org/index.php?title=AcaWiki:Top_100_Papers&diff=5884 2011-07-29T03:03:07Z

<p>Spanther: /* Papers */</p> <hr /> <div>We are driving towards gathering summaries of the Top 100 academic papers in the world. This is a large effort to increase the number of our papers, get more students, more researchers, and academics to know about the project and share their specific knowledge. We need your specific expertise to make this project sucessful. <br /> <br /> {{RightTOCLevels|limit=2}}<br /> <br /> = HOWTO =<br /> <br /> The [https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=28656 original idea came from the community].<br /> <br /> To make this work we need to:<br /> <br /> * (DONE) Create a list of the Top 20 Domains<br /> * [[Help:Editing|Help edit this wiki]] (its open for you to help with!)<br /> * Create sources per domain where to pull from.<br /> * Develop leaders per domain<br /> * Get at least 5 papers per domain<br /> ** Think that another paper is more important than the 5 already listed? [[Special:AddData/Summary|Summarize it]] and add it to the list!<br /> <br /> = Additional Resources =<br /> <br /> * [http://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/1168/what-papers-should-everyone-read What papers should everyone read?] - Theoretical Computer Science<br /> <br /> * [http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/10/09/1065676090723.html The five most cited papers]<br /> <br /> * [http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/stats/articles Most Cited Computer Science Articles]<br /> <br /> * [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_important_publications_in_computer_science List of important publications in computer science]<br /> <br /> * [http://in-cites.com/nobel/index.html The 100 Most-Cited Scientists]<br /> <br /> * [http://isihighlycited.com/ ISIHighlyCited.com]<br /> <br /> * [http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/story.asp?storyCode=405956&amp;sectioncode=26 Most cited authors of books in the humanities, 2007]<br /> <br /> * [http://archive.sciencewatch.com/sept-oct2003/sw_sept-oct2003_page2.htm Most-Cited Researchers, 1983-2002]<br /> <br /> * [http://repec.org/ Research Papers in Economics]<br /> <br /> * [http://www.harzing.com/pp_gs.htm Google Scholar - a new data source for citation analysis]<br /> <br /> * [http://wokinfo.com/products_tools/analytical/jcr/ Journal Citation Reports]<br /> <br /> * [http://www.librijournal.org/pdf/2005-4pp170-180.pdf Google Scholar: The New Generation of Citation Indexes]<br /> <br /> * [http://www.librijournal.org/ International Journal of Libraries and Information Services]<br /> <br /> = Collaboration and Communication =<br /> <br /> ''Please join us in spreading the news about this drive, and join us in chat as well!''<br /> <br /> * Public Social Networks<br /> * [[AcaWiki:Communications|Our Communication Channels]]<br /> <br /> = Top 100 Papers =<br /> <br /> == Anthropology ==<br /> <br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Arts and Literature ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Astronomy ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Biology ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Business ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Chemistry ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Clinical Research ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Computer Science ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Stack Exchange: [http://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/1168/what-papers-should-everyone-read What papers should everyone read?]<br /> ** NB: User contributions on Stack Exchange are licensed under [http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/ cc-wiki] with [http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2009/06/attribution-required/ attribution required]<br /> * Turing Award winners [http://twitter.com/RandomlyWalking/status/82385732467032064 (WP)], including papers they've written and the [http://www.informatik.uni-trier.de/~ley/db/journals/cacm/turing.html Turing Award lectures]<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> =====A mathematical theory of communication=====<br /> <br /> &quot;[http://guohanwei.51.net/code/A%20Mathematical%20Theory%20of%20Communication.pdf A mathematical theory of communication]&quot; by Claude Shannon, classics of information theory. Very readable. ([http://cm.bell-labs.com/cm/ms/what/shannonday/shannon1948.pdf Alternative link].)<br /> <br /> cc-by-sa [http://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/1168/what-papers-should-everyone-read/1172#1172 attribution]<br /> <br /> ===== On Computable Numbers, with an Application to the Entscheidungsproblem =====<br /> <br /> The 1936 paper that arguably started computer science:<br /> <br /> Alan Turing, &quot;[http://scholar.google.com/scholar?cluster=16882511564349146333 On Computable Numbers, with an Application to the Entscheidungsproblem]&quot;, Proceedings of the London Mathematical Society s2-42, 230–265, 1937. [http://dx.doi.org/10.1112/plms/s2-42.1.230 doi: 10.1112/plms/s2-42.1.230]<br /> <br /> In just 36 pages, Turing formulates (but does not name) the Turing Machine, recasts Gödel's famous First Incompleteness Theorem in terms of computation, describes the concept of universality, and in the appendix shows that computability by Turing machines is equivalent to computability by λ-definable functions (as studied by Church and Kleene).<br /> <br /> cc-by-sa [http://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/1168/what-papers-should-everyone-read/1170#1170 attribution]<br /> <br /> ===== Can Programming Be Liberated from the von Neumann Style? =====<br /> <br /> &quot;[http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.72.2622&amp;rep=rep1&amp;type=pdf Can Programming Be Liberated from the von Neumann Style? A Functional Style and Its Algebra of Programs]&quot; by John Backus. This is the 1977 ACM Turing Award Lecture in which Backus introduces functional programming to the world. ACM honored Backus with this award for his seminal work on FORTRAN and for being the B in BNF notation used for describing programming language syntax. I found this work to be really inspiring. It caused me to look at computers and programming languages in a whole new way.<br /> <br /> It also represents the kind of paper I wish there were more of. It exposes the inspiration and thought processing behind a nest of ideas without the rigorous but limiting tone of a research paper. It is a shame that researchers have to wait for an opportunity like the ACM Turing Award to be able to express themselves in this mode. Of course, few researchers can write like John Backus. This papers clarity of vision amazes me.<br /> <br /> cc-by-sa [http://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/1168/what-papers-should-everyone-read/6785#6785 attribution] (comments from Paul Topping)<br /> <br /> == Economics ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Education ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> ** [[User:Viovio]]<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> =====Crisis in the Humanities=====<br /> &quot;[http://epc.buffalo.edu/authors/perloff/articles/crisis.html Crisis in the Humanities]&quot;, by Marjorie Perloff<br /> <br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Engineering ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Geosciences ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Health ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Mathematics ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * [http://mathoverflow.net/questions/2144 mathoverflow: A single paper everyone should read?]<br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> ===== The Yang-Mills Equations over Riemann Surfaces ===== <br /> The Yang-Mills Equations over Riemann Surfaces<br /> Author(s): M. F. Atiyah and R. Bott Source: Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series A, Mathematical and Physical Sciences, Vol. 308, No. 1505 (Mar. 17, 1983), pp. 523-615 Published by: The Royal Society [http://www.jstor.org/stable/37156 copy from JSTOR} [http://dx.doi.org/10.1098/rsta.1983.0017 find by DOI]<br /> : One professor called it &quot;the basis for truly 21st century mathematics.&quot; It is also reportedly accessible by beginning graduate students with some exposure to differential geometry and suitable for independent study or as a reading course. It is a 93 page paper and develops a lot of fundamental constructions and ideas from scratch. Here is [http://www.ams.org/mathscinet-getitem?mr=702806 Martin Guest's review on MathSciNet]. -Justin Kerry at [http://mathoverflow.net/questions/2144/a-single-paper-everyone-should-read/15347#15347 cc-by-sa attribution]<br /> : For about 5 years I carried my copy with me everywhere I went, in an increasingly decrepit 3-ring binder weighed down by page after page of my own notes and explanations. One day, at a conference, a dispute arose over whether the main result of the paper held with integral coefficients or required one to work over the rationals. In the flash of an eye, four or five of us pulled out our copies and opened to the relevant page. Luckily, I was right: integral coefficients. The first time I left home without the paper, it felt like a rite of passage. Or at least that's the way I remember it. – Dan Ramras at [http://mathoverflow.net/questions/2144/a-single-paper-everyone-should-read/15347#15347 cc-by-sa attribution]<br /> <br /> ===== On formally undecidable propositions of Principia Mathematica and related systems =====<br /> Kurt Gödel's [http://www.csee.wvu.edu/~xinl/library/papers/math/Godel.pdf On formally undecidable propositions of Principia Mathematica and related systems]. See [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_Formally_Undecidable_Propositions_of_Principia_Mathematica_and_Related_Systems its Wikipedia article]<br /> <br /> cc-by-sa [http://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/1168/what-papers-should-everyone-read/2218#2218 attribution]<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Medicine ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Neuroscience ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Philosophy ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Physics ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> * Posting a question at [http://physicsoverflow.com/ Physics Overflow] might yield some interesting responses<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> =====The Unreasonable Effectiveness of Mathematics in the Natural Sciences=====<br /> [http://www.ipod.org.uk/reality/reality_wigner.pdf The Unreasonable Effectiveness of Mathematics in the Natural Sciences by Eugene Wigner]<br /> <br /> [http://mathoverflow.net/questions/2144/a-single-paper-everyone-should-read/43207#43207 cc-by-sa attribution]<br /> <br /> =====Quantum Mechanical Computers=====<br /> <br /> [http://www.springerlink.com/content/p1x27746x51x52mm/ Quantum Mechanical Computers (PDF) by Richard Feynman].<br /> <br /> :He introduces the idea of quantum computation, describes quantum circuits, explains how classical circuits can be simulated by quantum circuits, and shows how quantum circuits can compute functions without lots of garbage qubits (using uncomputation).<br /> <br /> :He then shows how any classical circuit can be encoded into a time-independent Hamiltonian! His proof goes through for quantum circuits too, therefore showing that time evolving Hamiltonians is BQP-hard! His Hamiltonian construction is also used in the proof of the quantum version of the Cook-Levin theorem, proved by Kitaev, which shows that k-local Hamiltonian is QMA-complete. cc-by-sa [http://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/1168/what-papers-should-everyone-read/1177#1177 attribution]<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Psychology ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * [http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1698090 &quot;Why Do Humans Reason? Arguments for an Argumentative Theory,&quot;] by Hugo Mercier and Dan Sperber, Behavioral and Brain Sciences, Vol. 34, No. 2, pp. 57-74, 2011<br /> : Jonathan Haidt [http://edge.org/conversation/the-argumentative-theory said] &quot;so important that the abstracts... should be posted in psychology departments all over the country.&quot; and that “the article is one of my favorite papers of the last ten years. I believe that they have solved one of the most important and longstanding puzzles in psychology: why are we so good at reasoning in some cases, but so hopelessly biased in others?<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Sociology ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Sociology Papers ====<br /> Sociology is a big field with many branches (e.g. network research, health communication, media effects, organizational communication, classical sociology, etc.). Perhaps it would be better to make top 5's for each?<br /> <br /> * Bowker, G. C., &amp; Star, S. L. (1999). [[Sorting things out: Classification and its consequences]]. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. <br /> * Granovetter, M. (1983). &quot;[[The strength of weak ties: A network theory revisited]]&quot;. Sociological Theory 1: 201–233. doi:[http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/202051 10.2307/202051]. JSTOR 202051.<br /> * Watts, D. J. (2004). [[The new science of networks]]. Annual Review of Sociology, 30(1), 243-270. DOI:[http://dx.doi.org/10.1146/annurev.soc.30.020404.104342 10.1146/annurev.soc.30.020404.104342], see also [http://enwp.org/Mark_Granovetter#The_strength_of_weak_ties]<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> <br /> [[Category:Activity]]</div>

Spanther https://acawiki.org/index.php?title=AcaWiki:Top_100_Papers&diff=5883 2011-07-29T03:00:45Z

<p>Spanther: /* Papers */</p> <hr /> <div>We are driving towards gathering summaries of the Top 100 academic papers in the world. This is a large effort to increase the number of our papers, get more students, more researchers, and academics to know about the project and share their specific knowledge. We need your specific expertise to make this project sucessful. <br /> <br /> {{RightTOCLevels|limit=2}}<br /> <br /> = HOWTO =<br /> <br /> The [https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=28656 original idea came from the community].<br /> <br /> To make this work we need to:<br /> <br /> * (DONE) Create a list of the Top 20 Domains<br /> * [[Help:Editing|Help edit this wiki]] (its open for you to help with!)<br /> * Create sources per domain where to pull from.<br /> * Develop leaders per domain<br /> * Get at least 5 papers per domain<br /> ** Think that another paper is more important than the 5 already listed? [[Special:AddData/Summary|Summarize it]] and add it to the list!<br /> <br /> = Additional Resources =<br /> <br /> * [http://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/1168/what-papers-should-everyone-read What papers should everyone read?] - Theoretical Computer Science<br /> <br /> * [http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/10/09/1065676090723.html The five most cited papers]<br /> <br /> * [http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/stats/articles Most Cited Computer Science Articles]<br /> <br /> * [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_important_publications_in_computer_science List of important publications in computer science]<br /> <br /> * [http://in-cites.com/nobel/index.html The 100 Most-Cited Scientists]<br /> <br /> * [http://isihighlycited.com/ ISIHighlyCited.com]<br /> <br /> * [http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/story.asp?storyCode=405956&amp;sectioncode=26 Most cited authors of books in the humanities, 2007]<br /> <br /> * [http://archive.sciencewatch.com/sept-oct2003/sw_sept-oct2003_page2.htm Most-Cited Researchers, 1983-2002]<br /> <br /> * [http://repec.org/ Research Papers in Economics]<br /> <br /> * [http://www.harzing.com/pp_gs.htm Google Scholar - a new data source for citation analysis]<br /> <br /> * [http://wokinfo.com/products_tools/analytical/jcr/ Journal Citation Reports]<br /> <br /> * [http://www.librijournal.org/pdf/2005-4pp170-180.pdf Google Scholar: The New Generation of Citation Indexes]<br /> <br /> * [http://www.librijournal.org/ International Journal of Libraries and Information Services]<br /> <br /> = Collaboration and Communication =<br /> <br /> ''Please join us in spreading the news about this drive, and join us in chat as well!''<br /> <br /> * Public Social Networks<br /> * [[AcaWiki:Communications|Our Communication Channels]]<br /> <br /> = Top 100 Papers =<br /> <br /> == Anthropology ==<br /> <br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Arts and Literature ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Astronomy ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Biology ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Business ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Chemistry ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Clinical Research ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Computer Science ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Stack Exchange: [http://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/1168/what-papers-should-everyone-read What papers should everyone read?]<br /> ** NB: User contributions on Stack Exchange are licensed under [http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/ cc-wiki] with [http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2009/06/attribution-required/ attribution required]<br /> * Turing Award winners [http://twitter.com/RandomlyWalking/status/82385732467032064 (WP)], including papers they've written and the [http://www.informatik.uni-trier.de/~ley/db/journals/cacm/turing.html Turing Award lectures]<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> =====A mathematical theory of communication=====<br /> <br /> &quot;[http://guohanwei.51.net/code/A%20Mathematical%20Theory%20of%20Communication.pdf A mathematical theory of communication]&quot; by Claude Shannon, classics of information theory. Very readable. ([http://cm.bell-labs.com/cm/ms/what/shannonday/shannon1948.pdf Alternative link].)<br /> <br /> cc-by-sa [http://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/1168/what-papers-should-everyone-read/1172#1172 attribution]<br /> <br /> ===== On Computable Numbers, with an Application to the Entscheidungsproblem =====<br /> <br /> The 1936 paper that arguably started computer science:<br /> <br /> Alan Turing, &quot;[http://scholar.google.com/scholar?cluster=16882511564349146333 On Computable Numbers, with an Application to the Entscheidungsproblem]&quot;, Proceedings of the London Mathematical Society s2-42, 230–265, 1937. [http://dx.doi.org/10.1112/plms/s2-42.1.230 doi: 10.1112/plms/s2-42.1.230]<br /> <br /> In just 36 pages, Turing formulates (but does not name) the Turing Machine, recasts Gödel's famous First Incompleteness Theorem in terms of computation, describes the concept of universality, and in the appendix shows that computability by Turing machines is equivalent to computability by λ-definable functions (as studied by Church and Kleene).<br /> <br /> cc-by-sa [http://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/1168/what-papers-should-everyone-read/1170#1170 attribution]<br /> <br /> ===== Can Programming Be Liberated from the von Neumann Style? =====<br /> <br /> &quot;[http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.72.2622&amp;rep=rep1&amp;type=pdf Can Programming Be Liberated from the von Neumann Style? A Functional Style and Its Algebra of Programs]&quot; by John Backus. This is the 1977 ACM Turing Award Lecture in which Backus introduces functional programming to the world. ACM honored Backus with this award for his seminal work on FORTRAN and for being the B in BNF notation used for describing programming language syntax. I found this work to be really inspiring. It caused me to look at computers and programming languages in a whole new way.<br /> <br /> It also represents the kind of paper I wish there were more of. It exposes the inspiration and thought processing behind a nest of ideas without the rigorous but limiting tone of a research paper. It is a shame that researchers have to wait for an opportunity like the ACM Turing Award to be able to express themselves in this mode. Of course, few researchers can write like John Backus. This papers clarity of vision amazes me.<br /> <br /> cc-by-sa [http://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/1168/what-papers-should-everyone-read/6785#6785 attribution] (comments from Paul Topping)<br /> <br /> == Economics ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Education ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> ** [[User:Viovio]]<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Crisis in the Humanities<br /> &quot;[http://epc.buffalo.edu/authors/perloff/articles/crisis.html Crisis in the Humanities]&quot;, by Marjorie Perloff<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Engineering ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Geosciences ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Health ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Mathematics ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * [http://mathoverflow.net/questions/2144 mathoverflow: A single paper everyone should read?]<br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> ===== The Yang-Mills Equations over Riemann Surfaces ===== <br /> The Yang-Mills Equations over Riemann Surfaces<br /> Author(s): M. F. Atiyah and R. Bott Source: Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series A, Mathematical and Physical Sciences, Vol. 308, No. 1505 (Mar. 17, 1983), pp. 523-615 Published by: The Royal Society [http://www.jstor.org/stable/37156 copy from JSTOR} [http://dx.doi.org/10.1098/rsta.1983.0017 find by DOI]<br /> : One professor called it &quot;the basis for truly 21st century mathematics.&quot; It is also reportedly accessible by beginning graduate students with some exposure to differential geometry and suitable for independent study or as a reading course. It is a 93 page paper and develops a lot of fundamental constructions and ideas from scratch. Here is [http://www.ams.org/mathscinet-getitem?mr=702806 Martin Guest's review on MathSciNet]. -Justin Kerry at [http://mathoverflow.net/questions/2144/a-single-paper-everyone-should-read/15347#15347 cc-by-sa attribution]<br /> : For about 5 years I carried my copy with me everywhere I went, in an increasingly decrepit 3-ring binder weighed down by page after page of my own notes and explanations. One day, at a conference, a dispute arose over whether the main result of the paper held with integral coefficients or required one to work over the rationals. In the flash of an eye, four or five of us pulled out our copies and opened to the relevant page. Luckily, I was right: integral coefficients. The first time I left home without the paper, it felt like a rite of passage. Or at least that's the way I remember it. – Dan Ramras at [http://mathoverflow.net/questions/2144/a-single-paper-everyone-should-read/15347#15347 cc-by-sa attribution]<br /> <br /> ===== On formally undecidable propositions of Principia Mathematica and related systems =====<br /> Kurt Gödel's [http://www.csee.wvu.edu/~xinl/library/papers/math/Godel.pdf On formally undecidable propositions of Principia Mathematica and related systems]. See [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_Formally_Undecidable_Propositions_of_Principia_Mathematica_and_Related_Systems its Wikipedia article]<br /> <br /> cc-by-sa [http://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/1168/what-papers-should-everyone-read/2218#2218 attribution]<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Medicine ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Neuroscience ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Philosophy ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Physics ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> * Posting a question at [http://physicsoverflow.com/ Physics Overflow] might yield some interesting responses<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> =====The Unreasonable Effectiveness of Mathematics in the Natural Sciences=====<br /> [http://www.ipod.org.uk/reality/reality_wigner.pdf The Unreasonable Effectiveness of Mathematics in the Natural Sciences by Eugene Wigner]<br /> <br /> [http://mathoverflow.net/questions/2144/a-single-paper-everyone-should-read/43207#43207 cc-by-sa attribution]<br /> <br /> =====Quantum Mechanical Computers=====<br /> <br /> [http://www.springerlink.com/content/p1x27746x51x52mm/ Quantum Mechanical Computers (PDF) by Richard Feynman].<br /> <br /> :He introduces the idea of quantum computation, describes quantum circuits, explains how classical circuits can be simulated by quantum circuits, and shows how quantum circuits can compute functions without lots of garbage qubits (using uncomputation).<br /> <br /> :He then shows how any classical circuit can be encoded into a time-independent Hamiltonian! His proof goes through for quantum circuits too, therefore showing that time evolving Hamiltonians is BQP-hard! His Hamiltonian construction is also used in the proof of the quantum version of the Cook-Levin theorem, proved by Kitaev, which shows that k-local Hamiltonian is QMA-complete. cc-by-sa [http://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/1168/what-papers-should-everyone-read/1177#1177 attribution]<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Psychology ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * [http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1698090 &quot;Why Do Humans Reason? Arguments for an Argumentative Theory,&quot;] by Hugo Mercier and Dan Sperber, Behavioral and Brain Sciences, Vol. 34, No. 2, pp. 57-74, 2011<br /> : Jonathan Haidt [http://edge.org/conversation/the-argumentative-theory said] &quot;so important that the abstracts... should be posted in psychology departments all over the country.&quot; and that “the article is one of my favorite papers of the last ten years. I believe that they have solved one of the most important and longstanding puzzles in psychology: why are we so good at reasoning in some cases, but so hopelessly biased in others?<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Sociology ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Sociology Papers ====<br /> Sociology is a big field with many branches (e.g. network research, health communication, media effects, organizational communication, classical sociology, etc.). Perhaps it would be better to make top 5's for each?<br /> <br /> * Bowker, G. C., &amp; Star, S. L. (1999). [[Sorting things out: Classification and its consequences]]. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. <br /> * Granovetter, M. (1983). &quot;[[The strength of weak ties: A network theory revisited]]&quot;. Sociological Theory 1: 201–233. doi:[http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/202051 10.2307/202051]. JSTOR 202051.<br /> * Watts, D. J. (2004). [[The new science of networks]]. Annual Review of Sociology, 30(1), 243-270. DOI:[http://dx.doi.org/10.1146/annurev.soc.30.020404.104342 10.1146/annurev.soc.30.020404.104342], see also [http://enwp.org/Mark_Granovetter#The_strength_of_weak_ties]<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> <br /> [[Category:Activity]]</div>

Spanther https://acawiki.org/index.php?title=AcaWiki:Top_100_Papers&diff=5882 2011-07-29T02:56:20Z

<p>Spanther: /* Crisis in the Humanities */</p> <hr /> <div>We are driving towards gathering summaries of the Top 100 academic papers in the world. This is a large effort to increase the number of our papers, get more students, more researchers, and academics to know about the project and share their specific knowledge. We need your specific expertise to make this project sucessful. <br /> <br /> {{RightTOCLevels|limit=2}}<br /> <br /> = HOWTO =<br /> <br /> The [https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=28656 original idea came from the community].<br /> <br /> To make this work we need to:<br /> <br /> * (DONE) Create a list of the Top 20 Domains<br /> * [[Help:Editing|Help edit this wiki]] (its open for you to help with!)<br /> * Create sources per domain where to pull from.<br /> * Develop leaders per domain<br /> * Get at least 5 papers per domain<br /> ** Think that another paper is more important than the 5 already listed? [[Special:AddData/Summary|Summarize it]] and add it to the list!<br /> <br /> = Additional Resources =<br /> <br /> * [http://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/1168/what-papers-should-everyone-read What papers should everyone read?] - Theoretical Computer Science<br /> <br /> * [http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/10/09/1065676090723.html The five most cited papers]<br /> <br /> * [http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/stats/articles Most Cited Computer Science Articles]<br /> <br /> * [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_important_publications_in_computer_science List of important publications in computer science]<br /> <br /> * [http://in-cites.com/nobel/index.html The 100 Most-Cited Scientists]<br /> <br /> * [http://isihighlycited.com/ ISIHighlyCited.com]<br /> <br /> * [http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/story.asp?storyCode=405956&amp;sectioncode=26 Most cited authors of books in the humanities, 2007]<br /> <br /> * [http://archive.sciencewatch.com/sept-oct2003/sw_sept-oct2003_page2.htm Most-Cited Researchers, 1983-2002]<br /> <br /> * [http://repec.org/ Research Papers in Economics]<br /> <br /> * [http://www.harzing.com/pp_gs.htm Google Scholar - a new data source for citation analysis]<br /> <br /> * [http://wokinfo.com/products_tools/analytical/jcr/ Journal Citation Reports]<br /> <br /> * [http://www.librijournal.org/pdf/2005-4pp170-180.pdf Google Scholar: The New Generation of Citation Indexes]<br /> <br /> * [http://www.librijournal.org/ International Journal of Libraries and Information Services]<br /> <br /> = Collaboration and Communication =<br /> <br /> ''Please join us in spreading the news about this drive, and join us in chat as well!''<br /> <br /> * Public Social Networks<br /> * [[AcaWiki:Communications|Our Communication Channels]]<br /> <br /> = Top 100 Papers =<br /> <br /> == Anthropology ==<br /> <br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Arts and Literature ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Astronomy ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Biology ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Business ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Chemistry ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Clinical Research ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Computer Science ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Stack Exchange: [http://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/1168/what-papers-should-everyone-read What papers should everyone read?]<br /> ** NB: User contributions on Stack Exchange are licensed under [http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/ cc-wiki] with [http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2009/06/attribution-required/ attribution required]<br /> * Turing Award winners [http://twitter.com/RandomlyWalking/status/82385732467032064 (WP)], including papers they've written and the [http://www.informatik.uni-trier.de/~ley/db/journals/cacm/turing.html Turing Award lectures]<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> =====A mathematical theory of communication=====<br /> <br /> &quot;[http://guohanwei.51.net/code/A%20Mathematical%20Theory%20of%20Communication.pdf A mathematical theory of communication]&quot; by Claude Shannon, classics of information theory. Very readable. ([http://cm.bell-labs.com/cm/ms/what/shannonday/shannon1948.pdf Alternative link].)<br /> <br /> cc-by-sa [http://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/1168/what-papers-should-everyone-read/1172#1172 attribution]<br /> <br /> ===== On Computable Numbers, with an Application to the Entscheidungsproblem =====<br /> <br /> The 1936 paper that arguably started computer science:<br /> <br /> Alan Turing, &quot;[http://scholar.google.com/scholar?cluster=16882511564349146333 On Computable Numbers, with an Application to the Entscheidungsproblem]&quot;, Proceedings of the London Mathematical Society s2-42, 230–265, 1937. [http://dx.doi.org/10.1112/plms/s2-42.1.230 doi: 10.1112/plms/s2-42.1.230]<br /> <br /> In just 36 pages, Turing formulates (but does not name) the Turing Machine, recasts Gödel's famous First Incompleteness Theorem in terms of computation, describes the concept of universality, and in the appendix shows that computability by Turing machines is equivalent to computability by λ-definable functions (as studied by Church and Kleene).<br /> <br /> cc-by-sa [http://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/1168/what-papers-should-everyone-read/1170#1170 attribution]<br /> <br /> ===== Can Programming Be Liberated from the von Neumann Style? =====<br /> <br /> &quot;[http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.72.2622&amp;rep=rep1&amp;type=pdf Can Programming Be Liberated from the von Neumann Style? A Functional Style and Its Algebra of Programs]&quot; by John Backus. This is the 1977 ACM Turing Award Lecture in which Backus introduces functional programming to the world. ACM honored Backus with this award for his seminal work on FORTRAN and for being the B in BNF notation used for describing programming language syntax. I found this work to be really inspiring. It caused me to look at computers and programming languages in a whole new way.<br /> <br /> It also represents the kind of paper I wish there were more of. It exposes the inspiration and thought processing behind a nest of ideas without the rigorous but limiting tone of a research paper. It is a shame that researchers have to wait for an opportunity like the ACM Turing Award to be able to express themselves in this mode. Of course, few researchers can write like John Backus. This papers clarity of vision amazes me.<br /> <br /> cc-by-sa [http://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/1168/what-papers-should-everyone-read/6785#6785 attribution] (comments from Paul Topping)<br /> <br /> == Economics ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Education ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> ** [[User:Viovio]]<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Engineering ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Geosciences ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Health ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Mathematics ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * [http://mathoverflow.net/questions/2144 mathoverflow: A single paper everyone should read?]<br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> ===== The Yang-Mills Equations over Riemann Surfaces ===== <br /> The Yang-Mills Equations over Riemann Surfaces<br /> Author(s): M. F. Atiyah and R. Bott Source: Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series A, Mathematical and Physical Sciences, Vol. 308, No. 1505 (Mar. 17, 1983), pp. 523-615 Published by: The Royal Society [http://www.jstor.org/stable/37156 copy from JSTOR} [http://dx.doi.org/10.1098/rsta.1983.0017 find by DOI]<br /> : One professor called it &quot;the basis for truly 21st century mathematics.&quot; It is also reportedly accessible by beginning graduate students with some exposure to differential geometry and suitable for independent study or as a reading course. It is a 93 page paper and develops a lot of fundamental constructions and ideas from scratch. Here is [http://www.ams.org/mathscinet-getitem?mr=702806 Martin Guest's review on MathSciNet]. -Justin Kerry at [http://mathoverflow.net/questions/2144/a-single-paper-everyone-should-read/15347#15347 cc-by-sa attribution]<br /> : For about 5 years I carried my copy with me everywhere I went, in an increasingly decrepit 3-ring binder weighed down by page after page of my own notes and explanations. One day, at a conference, a dispute arose over whether the main result of the paper held with integral coefficients or required one to work over the rationals. In the flash of an eye, four or five of us pulled out our copies and opened to the relevant page. Luckily, I was right: integral coefficients. The first time I left home without the paper, it felt like a rite of passage. Or at least that's the way I remember it. – Dan Ramras at [http://mathoverflow.net/questions/2144/a-single-paper-everyone-should-read/15347#15347 cc-by-sa attribution]<br /> <br /> ===== On formally undecidable propositions of Principia Mathematica and related systems =====<br /> Kurt Gödel's [http://www.csee.wvu.edu/~xinl/library/papers/math/Godel.pdf On formally undecidable propositions of Principia Mathematica and related systems]. See [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_Formally_Undecidable_Propositions_of_Principia_Mathematica_and_Related_Systems its Wikipedia article]<br /> <br /> cc-by-sa [http://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/1168/what-papers-should-everyone-read/2218#2218 attribution]<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Medicine ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Neuroscience ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Philosophy ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Physics ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> * Posting a question at [http://physicsoverflow.com/ Physics Overflow] might yield some interesting responses<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> =====The Unreasonable Effectiveness of Mathematics in the Natural Sciences=====<br /> [http://www.ipod.org.uk/reality/reality_wigner.pdf The Unreasonable Effectiveness of Mathematics in the Natural Sciences by Eugene Wigner]<br /> <br /> [http://mathoverflow.net/questions/2144/a-single-paper-everyone-should-read/43207#43207 cc-by-sa attribution]<br /> <br /> =====Quantum Mechanical Computers=====<br /> <br /> [http://www.springerlink.com/content/p1x27746x51x52mm/ Quantum Mechanical Computers (PDF) by Richard Feynman].<br /> <br /> :He introduces the idea of quantum computation, describes quantum circuits, explains how classical circuits can be simulated by quantum circuits, and shows how quantum circuits can compute functions without lots of garbage qubits (using uncomputation).<br /> <br /> :He then shows how any classical circuit can be encoded into a time-independent Hamiltonian! His proof goes through for quantum circuits too, therefore showing that time evolving Hamiltonians is BQP-hard! His Hamiltonian construction is also used in the proof of the quantum version of the Cook-Levin theorem, proved by Kitaev, which shows that k-local Hamiltonian is QMA-complete. cc-by-sa [http://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/1168/what-papers-should-everyone-read/1177#1177 attribution]<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Psychology ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * [http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1698090 &quot;Why Do Humans Reason? Arguments for an Argumentative Theory,&quot;] by Hugo Mercier and Dan Sperber, Behavioral and Brain Sciences, Vol. 34, No. 2, pp. 57-74, 2011<br /> : Jonathan Haidt [http://edge.org/conversation/the-argumentative-theory said] &quot;so important that the abstracts... should be posted in psychology departments all over the country.&quot; and that “the article is one of my favorite papers of the last ten years. I believe that they have solved one of the most important and longstanding puzzles in psychology: why are we so good at reasoning in some cases, but so hopelessly biased in others?<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Sociology ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Sociology Papers ====<br /> Sociology is a big field with many branches (e.g. network research, health communication, media effects, organizational communication, classical sociology, etc.). Perhaps it would be better to make top 5's for each?<br /> <br /> * Bowker, G. C., &amp; Star, S. L. (1999). [[Sorting things out: Classification and its consequences]]. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. <br /> * Granovetter, M. (1983). &quot;[[The strength of weak ties: A network theory revisited]]&quot;. Sociological Theory 1: 201–233. doi:[http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/202051 10.2307/202051]. JSTOR 202051.<br /> * Watts, D. J. (2004). [[The new science of networks]]. Annual Review of Sociology, 30(1), 243-270. DOI:[http://dx.doi.org/10.1146/annurev.soc.30.020404.104342 10.1146/annurev.soc.30.020404.104342], see also [http://enwp.org/Mark_Granovetter#The_strength_of_weak_ties]<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> <br /> [[Category:Activity]]</div>

Spanther https://acawiki.org/index.php?title=AcaWiki:Top_100_Papers&diff=5881 2011-07-29T02:54:36Z

<p>Spanther: /* Papers */</p> <hr /> <div>We are driving towards gathering summaries of the Top 100 academic papers in the world. This is a large effort to increase the number of our papers, get more students, more researchers, and academics to know about the project and share their specific knowledge. We need your specific expertise to make this project sucessful. <br /> <br /> {{RightTOCLevels|limit=2}}<br /> <br /> = HOWTO =<br /> <br /> The [https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=28656 original idea came from the community].<br /> <br /> To make this work we need to:<br /> <br /> * (DONE) Create a list of the Top 20 Domains<br /> * [[Help:Editing|Help edit this wiki]] (its open for you to help with!)<br /> * Create sources per domain where to pull from.<br /> * Develop leaders per domain<br /> * Get at least 5 papers per domain<br /> ** Think that another paper is more important than the 5 already listed? [[Special:AddData/Summary|Summarize it]] and add it to the list!<br /> <br /> = Additional Resources =<br /> <br /> * [http://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/1168/what-papers-should-everyone-read What papers should everyone read?] - Theoretical Computer Science<br /> <br /> * [http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/10/09/1065676090723.html The five most cited papers]<br /> <br /> * [http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/stats/articles Most Cited Computer Science Articles]<br /> <br /> * [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_important_publications_in_computer_science List of important publications in computer science]<br /> <br /> * [http://in-cites.com/nobel/index.html The 100 Most-Cited Scientists]<br /> <br /> * [http://isihighlycited.com/ ISIHighlyCited.com]<br /> <br /> * [http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/story.asp?storyCode=405956&amp;sectioncode=26 Most cited authors of books in the humanities, 2007]<br /> <br /> * [http://archive.sciencewatch.com/sept-oct2003/sw_sept-oct2003_page2.htm Most-Cited Researchers, 1983-2002]<br /> <br /> * [http://repec.org/ Research Papers in Economics]<br /> <br /> * [http://www.harzing.com/pp_gs.htm Google Scholar - a new data source for citation analysis]<br /> <br /> * [http://wokinfo.com/products_tools/analytical/jcr/ Journal Citation Reports]<br /> <br /> * [http://www.librijournal.org/pdf/2005-4pp170-180.pdf Google Scholar: The New Generation of Citation Indexes]<br /> <br /> * [http://www.librijournal.org/ International Journal of Libraries and Information Services]<br /> <br /> = Collaboration and Communication =<br /> <br /> ''Please join us in spreading the news about this drive, and join us in chat as well!''<br /> <br /> * Public Social Networks<br /> * [[AcaWiki:Communications|Our Communication Channels]]<br /> <br /> = Top 100 Papers =<br /> <br /> == Anthropology ==<br /> <br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Arts and Literature ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Astronomy ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Biology ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Business ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Chemistry ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Clinical Research ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Computer Science ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Stack Exchange: [http://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/1168/what-papers-should-everyone-read What papers should everyone read?]<br /> ** NB: User contributions on Stack Exchange are licensed under [http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/ cc-wiki] with [http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2009/06/attribution-required/ attribution required]<br /> * Turing Award winners [http://twitter.com/RandomlyWalking/status/82385732467032064 (WP)], including papers they've written and the [http://www.informatik.uni-trier.de/~ley/db/journals/cacm/turing.html Turing Award lectures]<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> =====A mathematical theory of communication=====<br /> <br /> &quot;[http://guohanwei.51.net/code/A%20Mathematical%20Theory%20of%20Communication.pdf A mathematical theory of communication]&quot; by Claude Shannon, classics of information theory. Very readable. ([http://cm.bell-labs.com/cm/ms/what/shannonday/shannon1948.pdf Alternative link].)<br /> <br /> cc-by-sa [http://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/1168/what-papers-should-everyone-read/1172#1172 attribution]<br /> <br /> ===== On Computable Numbers, with an Application to the Entscheidungsproblem =====<br /> <br /> The 1936 paper that arguably started computer science:<br /> <br /> Alan Turing, &quot;[http://scholar.google.com/scholar?cluster=16882511564349146333 On Computable Numbers, with an Application to the Entscheidungsproblem]&quot;, Proceedings of the London Mathematical Society s2-42, 230–265, 1937. [http://dx.doi.org/10.1112/plms/s2-42.1.230 doi: 10.1112/plms/s2-42.1.230]<br /> <br /> In just 36 pages, Turing formulates (but does not name) the Turing Machine, recasts Gödel's famous First Incompleteness Theorem in terms of computation, describes the concept of universality, and in the appendix shows that computability by Turing machines is equivalent to computability by λ-definable functions (as studied by Church and Kleene).<br /> <br /> cc-by-sa [http://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/1168/what-papers-should-everyone-read/1170#1170 attribution]<br /> <br /> ===== Can Programming Be Liberated from the von Neumann Style? =====<br /> <br /> &quot;[http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.72.2622&amp;rep=rep1&amp;type=pdf Can Programming Be Liberated from the von Neumann Style? A Functional Style and Its Algebra of Programs]&quot; by John Backus. This is the 1977 ACM Turing Award Lecture in which Backus introduces functional programming to the world. ACM honored Backus with this award for his seminal work on FORTRAN and for being the B in BNF notation used for describing programming language syntax. I found this work to be really inspiring. It caused me to look at computers and programming languages in a whole new way.<br /> <br /> It also represents the kind of paper I wish there were more of. It exposes the inspiration and thought processing behind a nest of ideas without the rigorous but limiting tone of a research paper. It is a shame that researchers have to wait for an opportunity like the ACM Turing Award to be able to express themselves in this mode. Of course, few researchers can write like John Backus. This papers clarity of vision amazes me.<br /> <br /> cc-by-sa [http://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/1168/what-papers-should-everyone-read/6785#6785 attribution] (comments from Paul Topping)<br /> <br /> == Economics ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Education ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> ** [[User:Viovio]]<br /> <br /> ==== Crisis in the Humanities ====<br /> <br /> * [http://epc.buffalo.edu/authors/perloff/articles/crisis.html] by Marjorie Perloff<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Engineering ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Geosciences ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Health ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Mathematics ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * [http://mathoverflow.net/questions/2144 mathoverflow: A single paper everyone should read?]<br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> ===== The Yang-Mills Equations over Riemann Surfaces ===== <br /> The Yang-Mills Equations over Riemann Surfaces<br /> Author(s): M. F. Atiyah and R. Bott Source: Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series A, Mathematical and Physical Sciences, Vol. 308, No. 1505 (Mar. 17, 1983), pp. 523-615 Published by: The Royal Society [http://www.jstor.org/stable/37156 copy from JSTOR} [http://dx.doi.org/10.1098/rsta.1983.0017 find by DOI]<br /> : One professor called it &quot;the basis for truly 21st century mathematics.&quot; It is also reportedly accessible by beginning graduate students with some exposure to differential geometry and suitable for independent study or as a reading course. It is a 93 page paper and develops a lot of fundamental constructions and ideas from scratch. Here is [http://www.ams.org/mathscinet-getitem?mr=702806 Martin Guest's review on MathSciNet]. -Justin Kerry at [http://mathoverflow.net/questions/2144/a-single-paper-everyone-should-read/15347#15347 cc-by-sa attribution]<br /> : For about 5 years I carried my copy with me everywhere I went, in an increasingly decrepit 3-ring binder weighed down by page after page of my own notes and explanations. One day, at a conference, a dispute arose over whether the main result of the paper held with integral coefficients or required one to work over the rationals. In the flash of an eye, four or five of us pulled out our copies and opened to the relevant page. Luckily, I was right: integral coefficients. The first time I left home without the paper, it felt like a rite of passage. Or at least that's the way I remember it. – Dan Ramras at [http://mathoverflow.net/questions/2144/a-single-paper-everyone-should-read/15347#15347 cc-by-sa attribution]<br /> <br /> ===== On formally undecidable propositions of Principia Mathematica and related systems =====<br /> Kurt Gödel's [http://www.csee.wvu.edu/~xinl/library/papers/math/Godel.pdf On formally undecidable propositions of Principia Mathematica and related systems]. See [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_Formally_Undecidable_Propositions_of_Principia_Mathematica_and_Related_Systems its Wikipedia article]<br /> <br /> cc-by-sa [http://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/1168/what-papers-should-everyone-read/2218#2218 attribution]<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Medicine ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Neuroscience ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Philosophy ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Physics ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> * Posting a question at [http://physicsoverflow.com/ Physics Overflow] might yield some interesting responses<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> =====The Unreasonable Effectiveness of Mathematics in the Natural Sciences=====<br /> [http://www.ipod.org.uk/reality/reality_wigner.pdf The Unreasonable Effectiveness of Mathematics in the Natural Sciences by Eugene Wigner]<br /> <br /> [http://mathoverflow.net/questions/2144/a-single-paper-everyone-should-read/43207#43207 cc-by-sa attribution]<br /> <br /> =====Quantum Mechanical Computers=====<br /> <br /> [http://www.springerlink.com/content/p1x27746x51x52mm/ Quantum Mechanical Computers (PDF) by Richard Feynman].<br /> <br /> :He introduces the idea of quantum computation, describes quantum circuits, explains how classical circuits can be simulated by quantum circuits, and shows how quantum circuits can compute functions without lots of garbage qubits (using uncomputation).<br /> <br /> :He then shows how any classical circuit can be encoded into a time-independent Hamiltonian! His proof goes through for quantum circuits too, therefore showing that time evolving Hamiltonians is BQP-hard! His Hamiltonian construction is also used in the proof of the quantum version of the Cook-Levin theorem, proved by Kitaev, which shows that k-local Hamiltonian is QMA-complete. cc-by-sa [http://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/1168/what-papers-should-everyone-read/1177#1177 attribution]<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Psychology ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * [http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1698090 &quot;Why Do Humans Reason? Arguments for an Argumentative Theory,&quot;] by Hugo Mercier and Dan Sperber, Behavioral and Brain Sciences, Vol. 34, No. 2, pp. 57-74, 2011<br /> : Jonathan Haidt [http://edge.org/conversation/the-argumentative-theory said] &quot;so important that the abstracts... should be posted in psychology departments all over the country.&quot; and that “the article is one of my favorite papers of the last ten years. I believe that they have solved one of the most important and longstanding puzzles in psychology: why are we so good at reasoning in some cases, but so hopelessly biased in others?<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Sociology ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Sociology Papers ====<br /> Sociology is a big field with many branches (e.g. network research, health communication, media effects, organizational communication, classical sociology, etc.). Perhaps it would be better to make top 5's for each?<br /> <br /> * Bowker, G. C., &amp; Star, S. L. (1999). [[Sorting things out: Classification and its consequences]]. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. <br /> * Granovetter, M. (1983). &quot;[[The strength of weak ties: A network theory revisited]]&quot;. Sociological Theory 1: 201–233. doi:[http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/202051 10.2307/202051]. JSTOR 202051.<br /> * Watts, D. J. (2004). [[The new science of networks]]. Annual Review of Sociology, 30(1), 243-270. DOI:[http://dx.doi.org/10.1146/annurev.soc.30.020404.104342 10.1146/annurev.soc.30.020404.104342], see also [http://enwp.org/Mark_Granovetter#The_strength_of_weak_ties]<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> <br /> [[Category:Activity]]</div>

Spanther https://acawiki.org/index.php?title=AcaWiki:Top_100_Papers&diff=5880 2011-07-29T02:14:42Z

<p>Spanther: /* Arts and Literarure */</p> <hr /> <div>We are driving towards gathering summaries of the Top 100 academic papers in the world. This is a large effort to increase the number of our papers, get more students, more researchers, and academics to know about the project and share their specific knowledge. We need your specific expertise to make this project sucessful. <br /> <br /> {{RightTOCLevels|limit=2}}<br /> <br /> = HOWTO =<br /> <br /> The [https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=28656 original idea came from the community].<br /> <br /> To make this work we need to:<br /> <br /> * (DONE) Create a list of the Top 20 Domains<br /> * [[Help:Editing|Help edit this wiki]] (its open for you to help with!)<br /> * Create sources per domain where to pull from.<br /> * Develop leaders per domain<br /> * Get at least 5 papers per domain<br /> ** Think that another paper is more important than the 5 already listed? [[Special:AddData/Summary|Summarize it]] and add it to the list!<br /> <br /> = Additional Resources =<br /> <br /> * [http://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/1168/what-papers-should-everyone-read What papers should everyone read?] - Theoretical Computer Science<br /> <br /> * [http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/10/09/1065676090723.html The five most cited papers]<br /> <br /> * [http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/stats/articles Most Cited Computer Science Articles]<br /> <br /> * [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_important_publications_in_computer_science List of important publications in computer science]<br /> <br /> * [http://in-cites.com/nobel/index.html The 100 Most-Cited Scientists]<br /> <br /> * [http://isihighlycited.com/ ISIHighlyCited.com]<br /> <br /> * [http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/story.asp?storyCode=405956&amp;sectioncode=26 Most cited authors of books in the humanities, 2007]<br /> <br /> * [http://archive.sciencewatch.com/sept-oct2003/sw_sept-oct2003_page2.htm Most-Cited Researchers, 1983-2002]<br /> <br /> * [http://repec.org/ Research Papers in Economics]<br /> <br /> * [http://www.harzing.com/pp_gs.htm Google Scholar - a new data source for citation analysis]<br /> <br /> * [http://wokinfo.com/products_tools/analytical/jcr/ Journal Citation Reports]<br /> <br /> * [http://www.librijournal.org/pdf/2005-4pp170-180.pdf Google Scholar: The New Generation of Citation Indexes]<br /> <br /> * [http://www.librijournal.org/ International Journal of Libraries and Information Services]<br /> <br /> = Collaboration and Communication =<br /> <br /> ''Please join us in spreading the news about this drive, and join us in chat as well!''<br /> <br /> * Public Social Networks<br /> * [[AcaWiki:Communications|Our Communication Channels]]<br /> <br /> = Top 100 Papers =<br /> <br /> == Anthropology ==<br /> <br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Arts and Literature ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Astronomy ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Biology ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Business ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Chemistry ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Clinical Research ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Computer Science ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Stack Exchange: [http://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/1168/what-papers-should-everyone-read What papers should everyone read?]<br /> ** NB: User contributions on Stack Exchange are licensed under [http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/ cc-wiki] with [http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2009/06/attribution-required/ attribution required]<br /> * Turing Award winners [http://twitter.com/RandomlyWalking/status/82385732467032064 (WP)], including papers they've written and the [http://www.informatik.uni-trier.de/~ley/db/journals/cacm/turing.html Turing Award lectures]<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> =====A mathematical theory of communication=====<br /> <br /> &quot;[http://guohanwei.51.net/code/A%20Mathematical%20Theory%20of%20Communication.pdf A mathematical theory of communication]&quot; by Claude Shannon, classics of information theory. Very readable. ([http://cm.bell-labs.com/cm/ms/what/shannonday/shannon1948.pdf Alternative link].)<br /> <br /> cc-by-sa [http://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/1168/what-papers-should-everyone-read/1172#1172 attribution]<br /> <br /> ===== On Computable Numbers, with an Application to the Entscheidungsproblem =====<br /> <br /> The 1936 paper that arguably started computer science:<br /> <br /> Alan Turing, &quot;[http://scholar.google.com/scholar?cluster=16882511564349146333 On Computable Numbers, with an Application to the Entscheidungsproblem]&quot;, Proceedings of the London Mathematical Society s2-42, 230–265, 1937. [http://dx.doi.org/10.1112/plms/s2-42.1.230 doi: 10.1112/plms/s2-42.1.230]<br /> <br /> In just 36 pages, Turing formulates (but does not name) the Turing Machine, recasts Gödel's famous First Incompleteness Theorem in terms of computation, describes the concept of universality, and in the appendix shows that computability by Turing machines is equivalent to computability by λ-definable functions (as studied by Church and Kleene).<br /> <br /> cc-by-sa [http://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/1168/what-papers-should-everyone-read/1170#1170 attribution]<br /> <br /> ===== Can Programming Be Liberated from the von Neumann Style? =====<br /> <br /> &quot;[http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.72.2622&amp;rep=rep1&amp;type=pdf Can Programming Be Liberated from the von Neumann Style? A Functional Style and Its Algebra of Programs]&quot; by John Backus. This is the 1977 ACM Turing Award Lecture in which Backus introduces functional programming to the world. ACM honored Backus with this award for his seminal work on FORTRAN and for being the B in BNF notation used for describing programming language syntax. I found this work to be really inspiring. It caused me to look at computers and programming languages in a whole new way.<br /> <br /> It also represents the kind of paper I wish there were more of. It exposes the inspiration and thought processing behind a nest of ideas without the rigorous but limiting tone of a research paper. It is a shame that researchers have to wait for an opportunity like the ACM Turing Award to be able to express themselves in this mode. Of course, few researchers can write like John Backus. This papers clarity of vision amazes me.<br /> <br /> cc-by-sa [http://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/1168/what-papers-should-everyone-read/6785#6785 attribution] (comments from Paul Topping)<br /> <br /> == Economics ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Education ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> ** [[User:Viovio]]<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Engineering ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Geosciences ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Health ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Mathematics ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * [http://mathoverflow.net/questions/2144 mathoverflow: A single paper everyone should read?]<br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> ===== The Yang-Mills Equations over Riemann Surfaces ===== <br /> The Yang-Mills Equations over Riemann Surfaces<br /> Author(s): M. F. Atiyah and R. Bott Source: Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series A, Mathematical and Physical Sciences, Vol. 308, No. 1505 (Mar. 17, 1983), pp. 523-615 Published by: The Royal Society [http://www.jstor.org/stable/37156 copy from JSTOR} [http://dx.doi.org/10.1098/rsta.1983.0017 find by DOI]<br /> : One professor called it &quot;the basis for truly 21st century mathematics.&quot; It is also reportedly accessible by beginning graduate students with some exposure to differential geometry and suitable for independent study or as a reading course. It is a 93 page paper and develops a lot of fundamental constructions and ideas from scratch. Here is [http://www.ams.org/mathscinet-getitem?mr=702806 Martin Guest's review on MathSciNet]. -Justin Kerry at [http://mathoverflow.net/questions/2144/a-single-paper-everyone-should-read/15347#15347 cc-by-sa attribution]<br /> : For about 5 years I carried my copy with me everywhere I went, in an increasingly decrepit 3-ring binder weighed down by page after page of my own notes and explanations. One day, at a conference, a dispute arose over whether the main result of the paper held with integral coefficients or required one to work over the rationals. In the flash of an eye, four or five of us pulled out our copies and opened to the relevant page. Luckily, I was right: integral coefficients. The first time I left home without the paper, it felt like a rite of passage. Or at least that's the way I remember it. – Dan Ramras at [http://mathoverflow.net/questions/2144/a-single-paper-everyone-should-read/15347#15347 cc-by-sa attribution]<br /> <br /> ===== On formally undecidable propositions of Principia Mathematica and related systems =====<br /> Kurt Gödel's [http://www.csee.wvu.edu/~xinl/library/papers/math/Godel.pdf On formally undecidable propositions of Principia Mathematica and related systems]. See [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_Formally_Undecidable_Propositions_of_Principia_Mathematica_and_Related_Systems its Wikipedia article]<br /> <br /> cc-by-sa [http://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/1168/what-papers-should-everyone-read/2218#2218 attribution]<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Medicine ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Neuroscience ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Philosophy ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Physics ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> * Posting a question at [http://physicsoverflow.com/ Physics Overflow] might yield some interesting responses<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> =====The Unreasonable Effectiveness of Mathematics in the Natural Sciences=====<br /> [http://www.ipod.org.uk/reality/reality_wigner.pdf The Unreasonable Effectiveness of Mathematics in the Natural Sciences by Eugene Wigner]<br /> <br /> [http://mathoverflow.net/questions/2144/a-single-paper-everyone-should-read/43207#43207 cc-by-sa attribution]<br /> <br /> =====Quantum Mechanical Computers=====<br /> <br /> [http://www.springerlink.com/content/p1x27746x51x52mm/ Quantum Mechanical Computers (PDF) by Richard Feynman].<br /> <br /> :He introduces the idea of quantum computation, describes quantum circuits, explains how classical circuits can be simulated by quantum circuits, and shows how quantum circuits can compute functions without lots of garbage qubits (using uncomputation).<br /> <br /> :He then shows how any classical circuit can be encoded into a time-independent Hamiltonian! His proof goes through for quantum circuits too, therefore showing that time evolving Hamiltonians is BQP-hard! His Hamiltonian construction is also used in the proof of the quantum version of the Cook-Levin theorem, proved by Kitaev, which shows that k-local Hamiltonian is QMA-complete. cc-by-sa [http://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/1168/what-papers-should-everyone-read/1177#1177 attribution]<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Psychology ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * [http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1698090 &quot;Why Do Humans Reason? Arguments for an Argumentative Theory,&quot;] by Hugo Mercier and Dan Sperber, Behavioral and Brain Sciences, Vol. 34, No. 2, pp. 57-74, 2011<br /> : Jonathan Haidt [http://edge.org/conversation/the-argumentative-theory said] &quot;so important that the abstracts... should be posted in psychology departments all over the country.&quot; and that “the article is one of my favorite papers of the last ten years. I believe that they have solved one of the most important and longstanding puzzles in psychology: why are we so good at reasoning in some cases, but so hopelessly biased in others?<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Sociology ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Sociology Papers ====<br /> Sociology is a big field with many branches (e.g. network research, health communication, media effects, organizational communication, classical sociology, etc.). Perhaps it would be better to make top 5's for each?<br /> <br /> * Bowker, G. C., &amp; Star, S. L. (1999). [[Sorting things out: Classification and its consequences]]. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. <br /> * Granovetter, M. (1983). &quot;[[The strength of weak ties: A network theory revisited]]&quot;. Sociological Theory 1: 201–233. doi:[http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/202051 10.2307/202051]. JSTOR 202051.<br /> * Watts, D. J. (2004). [[The new science of networks]]. Annual Review of Sociology, 30(1), 243-270. DOI:[http://dx.doi.org/10.1146/annurev.soc.30.020404.104342 10.1146/annurev.soc.30.020404.104342], see also [http://enwp.org/Mark_Granovetter#The_strength_of_weak_ties]<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> <br /> [[Category:Activity]]</div>

Spanther https://acawiki.org/index.php?title=AcaWiki:Top_100_Papers&diff=5879 2011-07-29T02:06:15Z

<p>Spanther: /* Additional Resources */</p> <hr /> <div>We are driving towards gathering summaries of the Top 100 academic papers in the world. This is a large effort to increase the number of our papers, get more students, more researchers, and academics to know about the project and share their specific knowledge. We need your specific expertise to make this project sucessful. <br /> <br /> {{RightTOCLevels|limit=2}}<br /> <br /> = HOWTO =<br /> <br /> The [https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=28656 original idea came from the community].<br /> <br /> To make this work we need to:<br /> <br /> * (DONE) Create a list of the Top 20 Domains<br /> * [[Help:Editing|Help edit this wiki]] (its open for you to help with!)<br /> * Create sources per domain where to pull from.<br /> * Develop leaders per domain<br /> * Get at least 5 papers per domain<br /> ** Think that another paper is more important than the 5 already listed? [[Special:AddData/Summary|Summarize it]] and add it to the list!<br /> <br /> = Additional Resources =<br /> <br /> * [http://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/1168/what-papers-should-everyone-read What papers should everyone read?] - Theoretical Computer Science<br /> <br /> * [http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/10/09/1065676090723.html The five most cited papers]<br /> <br /> * [http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/stats/articles Most Cited Computer Science Articles]<br /> <br /> * [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_important_publications_in_computer_science List of important publications in computer science]<br /> <br /> * [http://in-cites.com/nobel/index.html The 100 Most-Cited Scientists]<br /> <br /> * [http://isihighlycited.com/ ISIHighlyCited.com]<br /> <br /> * [http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/story.asp?storyCode=405956&amp;sectioncode=26 Most cited authors of books in the humanities, 2007]<br /> <br /> * [http://archive.sciencewatch.com/sept-oct2003/sw_sept-oct2003_page2.htm Most-Cited Researchers, 1983-2002]<br /> <br /> * [http://repec.org/ Research Papers in Economics]<br /> <br /> * [http://www.harzing.com/pp_gs.htm Google Scholar - a new data source for citation analysis]<br /> <br /> * [http://wokinfo.com/products_tools/analytical/jcr/ Journal Citation Reports]<br /> <br /> * [http://www.librijournal.org/pdf/2005-4pp170-180.pdf Google Scholar: The New Generation of Citation Indexes]<br /> <br /> * [http://www.librijournal.org/ International Journal of Libraries and Information Services]<br /> <br /> = Collaboration and Communication =<br /> <br /> ''Please join us in spreading the news about this drive, and join us in chat as well!''<br /> <br /> * Public Social Networks<br /> * [[AcaWiki:Communications|Our Communication Channels]]<br /> <br /> = Top 100 Papers =<br /> <br /> == Anthropology ==<br /> <br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Arts and Literarure ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Astronomy ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Biology ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Business ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Chemistry ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Clinical Research ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Computer Science ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Stack Exchange: [http://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/1168/what-papers-should-everyone-read What papers should everyone read?]<br /> ** NB: User contributions on Stack Exchange are licensed under [http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/ cc-wiki] with [http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2009/06/attribution-required/ attribution required]<br /> * Turing Award winners [http://twitter.com/RandomlyWalking/status/82385732467032064 (WP)], including papers they've written and the [http://www.informatik.uni-trier.de/~ley/db/journals/cacm/turing.html Turing Award lectures]<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> =====A mathematical theory of communication=====<br /> <br /> &quot;[http://guohanwei.51.net/code/A%20Mathematical%20Theory%20of%20Communication.pdf A mathematical theory of communication]&quot; by Claude Shannon, classics of information theory. Very readable. ([http://cm.bell-labs.com/cm/ms/what/shannonday/shannon1948.pdf Alternative link].)<br /> <br /> cc-by-sa [http://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/1168/what-papers-should-everyone-read/1172#1172 attribution]<br /> <br /> ===== On Computable Numbers, with an Application to the Entscheidungsproblem =====<br /> <br /> The 1936 paper that arguably started computer science:<br /> <br /> Alan Turing, &quot;[http://scholar.google.com/scholar?cluster=16882511564349146333 On Computable Numbers, with an Application to the Entscheidungsproblem]&quot;, Proceedings of the London Mathematical Society s2-42, 230–265, 1937. [http://dx.doi.org/10.1112/plms/s2-42.1.230 doi: 10.1112/plms/s2-42.1.230]<br /> <br /> In just 36 pages, Turing formulates (but does not name) the Turing Machine, recasts Gödel's famous First Incompleteness Theorem in terms of computation, describes the concept of universality, and in the appendix shows that computability by Turing machines is equivalent to computability by λ-definable functions (as studied by Church and Kleene).<br /> <br /> cc-by-sa [http://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/1168/what-papers-should-everyone-read/1170#1170 attribution]<br /> <br /> ===== Can Programming Be Liberated from the von Neumann Style? =====<br /> <br /> &quot;[http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.72.2622&amp;rep=rep1&amp;type=pdf Can Programming Be Liberated from the von Neumann Style? A Functional Style and Its Algebra of Programs]&quot; by John Backus. This is the 1977 ACM Turing Award Lecture in which Backus introduces functional programming to the world. ACM honored Backus with this award for his seminal work on FORTRAN and for being the B in BNF notation used for describing programming language syntax. I found this work to be really inspiring. It caused me to look at computers and programming languages in a whole new way.<br /> <br /> It also represents the kind of paper I wish there were more of. It exposes the inspiration and thought processing behind a nest of ideas without the rigorous but limiting tone of a research paper. It is a shame that researchers have to wait for an opportunity like the ACM Turing Award to be able to express themselves in this mode. Of course, few researchers can write like John Backus. This papers clarity of vision amazes me.<br /> <br /> cc-by-sa [http://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/1168/what-papers-should-everyone-read/6785#6785 attribution] (comments from Paul Topping)<br /> <br /> == Economics ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Education ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> ** [[User:Viovio]]<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Engineering ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Geosciences ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Health ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Mathematics ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * [http://mathoverflow.net/questions/2144 mathoverflow: A single paper everyone should read?]<br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> ===== The Yang-Mills Equations over Riemann Surfaces ===== <br /> The Yang-Mills Equations over Riemann Surfaces<br /> Author(s): M. F. Atiyah and R. Bott Source: Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series A, Mathematical and Physical Sciences, Vol. 308, No. 1505 (Mar. 17, 1983), pp. 523-615 Published by: The Royal Society [http://www.jstor.org/stable/37156 copy from JSTOR} [http://dx.doi.org/10.1098/rsta.1983.0017 find by DOI]<br /> : One professor called it &quot;the basis for truly 21st century mathematics.&quot; It is also reportedly accessible by beginning graduate students with some exposure to differential geometry and suitable for independent study or as a reading course. It is a 93 page paper and develops a lot of fundamental constructions and ideas from scratch. Here is [http://www.ams.org/mathscinet-getitem?mr=702806 Martin Guest's review on MathSciNet]. -Justin Kerry at [http://mathoverflow.net/questions/2144/a-single-paper-everyone-should-read/15347#15347 cc-by-sa attribution]<br /> : For about 5 years I carried my copy with me everywhere I went, in an increasingly decrepit 3-ring binder weighed down by page after page of my own notes and explanations. One day, at a conference, a dispute arose over whether the main result of the paper held with integral coefficients or required one to work over the rationals. In the flash of an eye, four or five of us pulled out our copies and opened to the relevant page. Luckily, I was right: integral coefficients. The first time I left home without the paper, it felt like a rite of passage. Or at least that's the way I remember it. – Dan Ramras at [http://mathoverflow.net/questions/2144/a-single-paper-everyone-should-read/15347#15347 cc-by-sa attribution]<br /> <br /> ===== On formally undecidable propositions of Principia Mathematica and related systems =====<br /> Kurt Gödel's [http://www.csee.wvu.edu/~xinl/library/papers/math/Godel.pdf On formally undecidable propositions of Principia Mathematica and related systems]. See [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_Formally_Undecidable_Propositions_of_Principia_Mathematica_and_Related_Systems its Wikipedia article]<br /> <br /> cc-by-sa [http://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/1168/what-papers-should-everyone-read/2218#2218 attribution]<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Medicine ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Neuroscience ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Philosophy ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Physics ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> * Posting a question at [http://physicsoverflow.com/ Physics Overflow] might yield some interesting responses<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> =====The Unreasonable Effectiveness of Mathematics in the Natural Sciences=====<br /> [http://www.ipod.org.uk/reality/reality_wigner.pdf The Unreasonable Effectiveness of Mathematics in the Natural Sciences by Eugene Wigner]<br /> <br /> [http://mathoverflow.net/questions/2144/a-single-paper-everyone-should-read/43207#43207 cc-by-sa attribution]<br /> <br /> =====Quantum Mechanical Computers=====<br /> <br /> [http://www.springerlink.com/content/p1x27746x51x52mm/ Quantum Mechanical Computers (PDF) by Richard Feynman].<br /> <br /> :He introduces the idea of quantum computation, describes quantum circuits, explains how classical circuits can be simulated by quantum circuits, and shows how quantum circuits can compute functions without lots of garbage qubits (using uncomputation).<br /> <br /> :He then shows how any classical circuit can be encoded into a time-independent Hamiltonian! His proof goes through for quantum circuits too, therefore showing that time evolving Hamiltonians is BQP-hard! His Hamiltonian construction is also used in the proof of the quantum version of the Cook-Levin theorem, proved by Kitaev, which shows that k-local Hamiltonian is QMA-complete. cc-by-sa [http://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/1168/what-papers-should-everyone-read/1177#1177 attribution]<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Psychology ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Papers ====<br /> <br /> * [http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1698090 &quot;Why Do Humans Reason? Arguments for an Argumentative Theory,&quot;] by Hugo Mercier and Dan Sperber, Behavioral and Brain Sciences, Vol. 34, No. 2, pp. 57-74, 2011<br /> : Jonathan Haidt [http://edge.org/conversation/the-argumentative-theory said] &quot;so important that the abstracts... should be posted in psychology departments all over the country.&quot; and that “the article is one of my favorite papers of the last ten years. I believe that they have solved one of the most important and longstanding puzzles in psychology: why are we so good at reasoning in some cases, but so hopelessly biased in others?<br /> <br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> == Sociology ==<br /> ==== Sources ====<br /> <br /> * Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper<br /> <br /> ==== People ====<br /> <br /> * Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!<br /> <br /> ==== Sociology Papers ====<br /> Sociology is a big field with many branches (e.g. network research, health communication, media effects, organizational communication, classical sociology, etc.). Perhaps it would be better to make top 5's for each?<br /> <br /> * Bowker, G. C., &amp; Star, S. L. (1999). [[Sorting things out: Classification and its consequences]]. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. <br /> * Granovetter, M. (1983). &quot;[[The strength of weak ties: A network theory revisited]]&quot;. Sociological Theory 1: 201–233. doi:[http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/202051 10.2307/202051]. JSTOR 202051.<br /> * Watts, D. J. (2004). [[The new science of networks]]. Annual Review of Sociology, 30(1), 243-270. DOI:[http://dx.doi.org/10.1146/annurev.soc.30.020404.104342 10.1146/annurev.soc.30.020404.104342], see also [http://enwp.org/Mark_Granovetter#The_strength_of_weak_ties]<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> * Add Paper here!<br /> <br /> <br /> [[Category:Activity]]</div>

Spanther https://acawiki.org/index.php?title=User:Spanther&diff=5878 2011-07-29T00:51:01Z

<p>Spanther: Created page with &quot;{{User |name=Spencer Young |location=San Francisco }}&quot;</p> <hr /> <div>{{User<br /> |name=Spencer Young<br /> |location=San Francisco<br /> }}</div>

Spanther