Post #751166
2026-03-19 10:32 UTC
Just received an email asking me to peer-review a paper, and asking me to decide whether to review it based on an abstract in which every piece of LaTeX code has been replaced with ‘[[EQUATION]]’, so that it reads like:
‘For [[EQUATION]], let [[EQUATION]] be the semigroup of partial bijections on the lattice [[EQUATION]]. For a subset [[EQUATION]] of [[EQUATION]] with size at most [[EQUATION]], we show that [[EQUATION]] and [[EQUATION]] are the unique possible...’
I am not quoting the actual text, but this gives the idea. The email was generated by the publisher's paper management system, so I assume it is to blame, not the editor.
Over the years, I have developed fairly low expectations of academic publishers, but this particular bit of incompetence is new to me.
#academia #AcademicPublishing #AcademicChatter
Replies (1)
-
@locallytrivial@mathstodon.xyz 2026-03-21 05:36
@ajcain The results in the paper are [adjective] and [adjective]. Therefore, I recommend that the paper be [decision].