This is my screenshot for the last week statistics, see attached.
This, of course, is impossible.
I will seriously downgrade my presence at this network. Something is obviously very very wrong in the way 'IT' marks and annotates things.
Have in mind that this disfunctionality is probably, 90%, due to the so-called AI - which is neither intelligence nor fully artificial (as it is created and maintained by humans).
I expect some feedback on this, but clearly this is less a question than a suggestion. Based on my long term-experience with this network.
Hope we all get serious and more prudent than we obviously are at the moment, and Good luck to us all.
I think we need to start seeking a different, perhaps even pre-IT, way of presenting and showcasing our academic work.
I will not promote the best answer, as suggested by the RG. I think academics should be much less competitive, and much much more cooperative (but again, not banded by the super-influential research team leaders who are too impressed by their own achievements or personalities.)
Dear Pehar Drazen ,
Some of today's applications run on computer platforms with large and inexpensive memories, which are also error-prone. Unfortu- nately, the appearance of even very few memory faults may jeopardize the correctness of the computational results. An algorithm is resilient to memory faults if, despite the corruption of some memory values before or during its execution, it is nevertheless able to get a correct output at least on the set of uncorrupted values. In this paper we will survey some recent work on reliable computation in the presence of memory faults.
Conference Paper Designing Reliable Algorithms in Unreliable Memories
Regards,
Shafagat
- Badges
- Science topic