SCIENTIFIC CONFERENCE
FALLS FOR GIBBERISH PRANK
Greg Frost
CAMBRIDGE, Mass. (Reuters) - A bunch of computer-generated
gibberish
masquerading as an academic paper has been accepted at a scientific
confe-
rence
in a victory for pranksters at the Massachusetts
Institute
of Technology.
Jeremy
Stribling said on Thursday that he and two fellow MIT graduate students
questioned the standards of some academic conferences, so they wrote a
computer
program to generate research papers complete with nonsensical text,
charts and
diagrams.
The
trio submitted two of the randomly assembled papers to the World
Multiconference on Systemics, Cybernetics and Informatics (WMSCI),
scheduled to
be held July 10-13 in Orlando, Florida.
To
their surprise, one of the papers -- "Rooter: A Methodology for the
Typical Unification of Access Points and Redundancy" -- was accepted
for
presentation.
The
prank recalled a 1996 hoax in which New York University physicist Alan Sokal succeeded in getting an
entire
paper with a mix of truths, falsehoods, non sequiturs and otherwise
meaningless
mumbo-jumbo published in the journal Social Text.
Stribling
said he and his colleagues only learned about the Social Text affair
after
submitting their paper. "Rooter" features such mind-bending gems as:
"the model for our heuristic consists of four independent components:
simulated annealing, active networks, flexible modalities, and the
study of
reinforcement learning" and "We implemented our scatter/gather I/O
server in Simula-67, augmented with opportunistically pipelined
extensions."
Stribling
said the trio targeted WMSCI because it is notorious within the field
of
computer science for sending copious e-mails that solicit admissions to
the
conference.
"We
were tired of the spam," Stribling told Reuters in a telephone
interview,
adding that his team wanted to challenge the standards of the
conference's peer
review process.
Nagib
Callaos, a conference organizer, said the paper
was
one of a small number accepted on a "non-reviewed" basis -- meaning
that reviewers had not yet given their feedback by the acceptance
deadline.
"We
thought that it might be unfair to refuse a paper that was not refused
by any
of its three selected reviewers," Callaos wrote in an e-mail. "The
author of a non-reviewed paper has complete responsibility of the
content of
their paper."
However,
Callaos said conference organizers were reviewing their acceptance
procedures
in light of the hoax. Asked whether he would disinvite the MIT
students, he
replied: "Bogus papers should not be included in the conference
program."
Stribling
said conference organizers had not yet formally rescinded their
invitation to
present the paper.
The
students were soliciting cash donations so they could attend the
conference and
give what Stribling billed as a "randomly generated talk." So far,
they have raised more than $2,000 over the Internet.
April 15, 2005.