Timeline for How often do people read the work that they cite?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
5 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 7, 2015 at 2:24 | comment | added | Nikos M. | +1 for the "courtesy" point mentioned | |
| Jun 5, 2012 at 12:37 | comment | added | Nik Weaver | Very interesting! | |
| Jun 5, 2012 at 6:50 | comment | added | Bruno | I do have an example of "correction mechanism". Working on a paper based on a published result, we were able to prove something "too strong". (Namely, we almost had $\mathsf P\neq\mathsf{NP}$.) We then were able to find the error in the cited paper. The problem was that the cited paper itself cited an older result, but forgetting some genericity hypotheses. Therefore, the result was possible to repair by adding some genericity conditions in it too. Yet, the correct version does not imply anything interesting with regards to our original question... | |
| Jun 5, 2012 at 0:31 | history | edited | Nik Weaver | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 244 characters in body
|
| Jun 5, 2012 at 0:26 | history | answered | Nik Weaver | CC BY-SA 3.0 |