Boost logo

Boost :

From: Hans Dembinski (hans.dembinski_at_[hidden])
Date: 2020-03-29 21:05:32

> On 29. Mar 2020, at 15:31, Kostas Savvidis via Boost <boost_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>> On Mar 29, 2020, at 15:52, David Bellot via Boost <boost_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>> he fact they had
>> published good academic papers or received excellent grades in various
>> topics is mostly irrelevant.
> As an academic person, I have to insert a little feeble word in defense of academia here.
> Papers are not like school grades. People have been through hellfire to get there.
> In my opinion, if somebody proposed to write code BASED on those papers you all should give
> them class-A consideration.
> Of course, If it far from their field of study, then it is once again somewhat irrelevant.

Disclaimer: I am not participating in GSoC, I am just reading this with interest.

Being also from academia, I like to disagree with you. You usually cannot tell how much of the paper content is really from the applicant. Most papers have several authors - at least in my field (particle physics).

A high number of published papers is not a reliable predictor of excellence. It could be a sign for a hard worker or a sign for a someone who puts quantity before quality. Similarly, a low citation count per paper may not be a sign for a weak applicant. Someone who is too far ahead of the curve is not getting cited. Only the (boring) mainstream gets many citations.

The quality and depth of the papers is more telling, but that is difficult to judge for someone outside of the field.

Boost list run by bdawes at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at