[e2e] simulation, sanity, citation, and storage

Dirk.Trossen@nokia.com Dirk.Trossen at nokia.com
Wed Nov 16 23:02:56 PST 2005


Sounds like a great idea, a reputation system for citations. Caution
though has to be given to the basis of information to be used to build
the system's information (I don't want to end up seeing researchers
"googling" up their references artificially).


>-----Original Message-----
>From: end2end-interest-bounces at postel.org 
>[mailto:end2end-interest-bounces at postel.org] On Behalf Of ext 
>Jon Crowcroft
>Sent: 16 November, 2005 18:38
>To: end2end-interest at postel.org
>Subject: [e2e] simulation, sanity, citation, and storage
>How perhaps not to do mobile nets research :-
>1. The random waypoint mobility model
>the most commonly used model for how devices move that is used 
>in 100s of papers for simulation of how good my new mobile ad 
>hoc routing protocol is compared to yours) - has non 
>stationary distribution of velocity in pretty much any 
>plausible 2D space, so you don't know when to stop/start 
>simulators using the random waypoint mobility model:
>This paper is whats wrong, and how to fix it:
>"Perfect Simulation and Stationarity of a Class of Mobility Models,"
>J.-Y. Le Boudec and M. Vojnovic, IEEE Infocom 2005, Miami, FL, 
>2005 (Infocom 2005 Best Paper Award) http://ica1www.epfl.ch/RandomTrip.
>2. Many simulation papers have not only got non reproduceable 
>results, but the quality of simulation papers is apparently 
>getting worse over time:
>This paper is about how this trend has progressed, and should 
>be essential reading for all 1st year grad students:)
>"{MANET} Simulation Studies: The Incredibles", by Stuart 
>Kurkowski and Tracy Camp and Michael Colagrosso, mc2r, 2005, 
>volume 9, 4, pages "50--61", 
>Its pretty "interesting" how bad things are out there:)
>Two possible social solutions:-
>a) on the one hand,
>so how about we introduce the idea (e..g via Vint Cerf, now at 
>google) to Google Scholar, of _negative_ citations. it ought 
>to be easy to add to the pagerank algorithm:)
>Given we find that a numnber of papers have been written that 
>are rooted on some baseline reference (e.g. the original NS 
>code for mobile IP, or the original random waypoint) when we 
>then show that the NS code is wrong, or the random waypoint 
>model cannot be used to compare results in simulation 
>experiments due to lack of stationarity, those papers all 
>suddenly have their citation count reduced:)
>b) on the other hand,
>if people post their _code_, then bugfixes to the  code would 
>accrue _positive_ citations. we could use google base for this 
>could be a repository for simulation
>code, configurations and draft papers
>(A bit like the science preprints idea, but for _supporting_ evidence.

More information about the end2end-interest mailing list