Oh no! Humanistic Informatics is far worse at publishing than Informatics. We’re even lagging 0.02 points behind Infomedia. Karltk explains all, in good old AD&D fashion.
Previous Post
job Next Post
summer break 1 Comment
Leave A Comment Cancel reply
Recommended Posts
Last night I attended the OpenAI Forum Welcome Reception at OpenAI’s new offices in San Francisco. The Forum is a recently launched initiative from OpenAI that is meant to be “a community designed to unite thoughtful contributors from a diverse array of […]
I’m thrilled to announce another publication from our European Research Council (ERC)-funded research project on Machine Vision: Gabriele de Setaand Anya Shchetvina‘s paper analysing how Chinese AI companies visually present machine vision technologies. They find that the Chinese machine vision imaginary is global, blue and competitive. […]
Whenever I give talks about ChatGPT and LLMs, whether to ninth graders, businesses or journalists, I meet people who are hungry for information, who really want to understand this new technology. I’ve interpreted this as interest and a need to understand – […]
Having your own words processed and restated can help you improve your thinking and your writing. That’s one reason why talking with someone about your ideas can help you clarify your thoughts. ChatGPT is certainly no replacement for a knowledgable friend or colleague, […]
Like the rest of the internet, I’ve been playing with ChatGPT, the new AI chatbot released by OpenAI, and I’ve been fascinated by how much it does well and how it still gets a lot wrong. ChatGPT is a foundation model, that […]
A few weeks ago Meta released Galactica, a language model that generates scientific papers based on a prompt you type in. They put it online and invited people to try it out, but had to remove it after just three days after […]
NumberCruncher
I could not reproduce Torleiv Kl¯veís results cited by Karltk, see my comments there. Here is an alternative ranking of the Overall Publication-Faculty Ratio and a new addition: The Prestige Publication-Faculty Ratio ñ where your department, HUMINF, does much better!
Overall Publication-Faculty Ratio
(Publication Points/Number of Faculty)
1. II-UiB: 1.96
2. IfI-UiO: 0.58
3. IDI-NTNU: 0.34
4. Infomedia-UiB: 0.33
5. HUMINF-UiB: 0.28
6. SFF QoS-NTNU: 0.22
7. IfI-Troms¯: 0.04
New: Prestige Publication-Faculty Ratio
(Level 2 Prestige Publication Share/Number of Faculty)
1. II-UiB: 0.24
2. HUMINF-UiB: 0.16
3. IfI-UiO: 0.06
4. IDI-NTNU: 0.04
5. SFF QoS-NTNU: 0.03
6. Infomedia-UiB: 0.02
7. IfI-Troms¯: 0.00
Note: The category ìNumber of Facultyî excludes administrative and support personnel. The ratios are based on data for the year 2004, available at http://dbh.nsd.uib.no/dbhvev/