help annotate
Contents Next: The Role of Up: Refereeing and Reliability Previous: Our Process of

[Annotate][Shownotes]


For this Proceedings , each paper has been read very thoroughly by a minimum of two grad students or post-docs or faculty members. These readers varied in ability and background but gamely challenged anything they didn't understand or believe to be true.

[Annotate][Shownotes]


Each of these readers had been asked to actively participate in the ``activation" of the paper, looking closely for places to expand on the exposition and in particular for useful places for live mathematics to go. In these settings, Maple codes (or in some cases Axiom, GAP, Pari, or Mathematica codes) have been placed. Where possible the provided code is closely related to the problem under examination; if not an actual algorithmization of the underlying expressions. This permits the reader to investigate the claims and observations of the author in situ and perhaps to down-load code for further analysis.
Then there is editorial responsibility. Rob Corless, Jonathan Borwein, Peter Borwein and Loki Jörgenson are prepared to accept some part of the blame if something inappropriate slips through. In this particular hyper-context, the task of editing has taken on new dimension and demanded a fresh approach to an ill defined process. The editors may be reached for comment (or criticism) at omp@cecm.sfu.ca.

Finally, we have put in place annotation and submission mechanisms which will allow readers to comment on a paper and even to submit articles to the collection; naturally, these comments are available for other readers to see. In some sense this provides an open forum refereeing process.


omp@cecm.sfu.ca