Anything Gets PublishedPosted: February 28, 2012
After first-hand experience of the randomness of the peer-review process, Daniel Lemire provided evidence that the process is basically useless. It does not guarantee that some quality standards are enforced or that original important papers will be published, with a huge inertia to accept really groundbreaking work. It is therefore a huge waste of everyone’s time which suggests that we would not be so much worse off if moving to a publish-then-filter system, à la arxiv.org.
But I had never realized how low the quality of published work could go before I received an application by a student, with a list of publications including papers presented at conferences and published in lectures notes by Springer. One is entitled “Necessity of Accurately Registration Parameters Calculation for Good Reconstruction in Super‐resolution from a set of low images”, another contains the term “impaction” which is probably not what the authors meant for an image processing paper… Obviously the authors are not native English speakers, but the fact that no one highlighted the problem nor made sure that it was corrected is appalling. This is just one more glaring example that peer-review does not work.