Remix.run Logo
tacomonstrous 7 hours ago

This is essentially irrelevant to the content of the post, but it's amusing to me that he casually mentions submitting to JAMS as if its acceptance were a mere formality.

gus_massa 6 hours ago | parent | next [-]

He has rejected papers too https://mathstodon.xyz/@tao/113721192051328193

Sharlin 5 hours ago | parent [-]

> With hindsight, some of my past rejections have become amusing. With a coauthor, I once almost solved a conjecture, establishing the result with an "epsilon loss" in a key parameter. We submitted to a highly reputable journal, but it was rejected on the grounds that it did not resolve the full conjecture. So we submitted elsewhere, and the paper was accepted.

> The following year, we managed to finally prove the full conjecture without the epsilon loss, and decided to try submitting to the highly reputable journal again. This time, the paper was rejected for only being an epsilon improvement over the previous literature!

hodgehog11 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

It basically is a formality at this level. Many top math researchers now hardly even submit to journals at all and just put up a preprint.

At this scale, peer review happens by the audience. They don't need a journal to get people reviewing their work.

7 hours ago | parent | prev [-]
[deleted]