Pointing to problems without suggesting solutions Planned maintenance scheduled April 23, 2019 at 23:30 UTC (7:30pm US/Eastern) Announcing the arrival of Valued Associate #679: Cesar Manara Unicorn Meta Zoo #1: Why another podcast?Handling unsolicited proofs of famous mathematical problemsSuggesting an alternative to referee/reviewer recommendationHow should I handle poor English in reviewing an article that claims to be proofread by two native English speakers?How to React to Incorrect Claims by Reviewers?How to deal with poorly written and formatted papers (as a reviewer)?Published papers with incorrect solutions of famous problems: how to raise concerns with editors?Suggesting connection to one's own paper in a referee reportSuggesting reviewers for a very sectorial double-blind submissionArticle submitted and clearly referee cannot understand basic premise-What to do?Suggesting Reviewers: How to find institutional affiliations

3D Masyu - A Die

Is there any significance to the prison numbers of the Beagle Boys starting with 176-?

Did John Wesley plagiarize Matthew Henry...?

Noise in Eigenvalues plot

Can haste grant me and my beast master companion extra attacks?

Does the transliteration of 'Dravidian' exist in Hindu scripture? Does 'Dravida' refer to a Geographical area or an ethnic group?

My mentor says to set image to Fine instead of RAW — how is this different from JPG?

What is the proper term for etching or digging of wall to hide conduit of cables

Found this skink in my tomato plant bucket. Is he trapped? Or could he leave if he wanted?

Inverse square law not accurate for non-point masses?

How do you write "wild blueberries flavored"?

Did any compiler fully use 80-bit floating point?

Weaponising the Grasp-at-a-Distance spell

How to make triangles with rounded sides and corners? (squircle with 3 sides)

Does the main washing effect of soap come from foam?

The Nth Gryphon Number

One-one communication

How much damage would a cupful of neutron star matter do to the Earth?

Relating to the President and obstruction, were Mueller's conclusions preordained?

Why BitLocker does not use RSA

Pointing to problems without suggesting solutions

Why is a lens darker than other ones when applying the same settings?

Order between one to one functions and their inverses

New Order #6: Easter Egg



Pointing to problems without suggesting solutions



Planned maintenance scheduled April 23, 2019 at 23:30 UTC (7:30pm US/Eastern)
Announcing the arrival of Valued Associate #679: Cesar Manara
Unicorn Meta Zoo #1: Why another podcast?Handling unsolicited proofs of famous mathematical problemsSuggesting an alternative to referee/reviewer recommendationHow should I handle poor English in reviewing an article that claims to be proofread by two native English speakers?How to React to Incorrect Claims by Reviewers?How to deal with poorly written and formatted papers (as a reviewer)?Published papers with incorrect solutions of famous problems: how to raise concerns with editors?Suggesting connection to one's own paper in a referee reportSuggesting reviewers for a very sectorial double-blind submissionArticle submitted and clearly referee cannot understand basic premise-What to do?Suggesting Reviewers: How to find institutional affiliations










5















As a peer reviewer, I sometimes feel there are issues in the manuscript but I'm not sure how they should be corrected/addressed, partly due to my inadequate expertise in those exact issues.



I also sometimes find some words/terms are incorrectly used, but as a non-native speaker I can't easily suggest alternatives.



Should I just point to such issues anyway, or ignore them since I couldn't suggest solutions?










share|improve this question

















  • 1





    If it ends us as a major revision that comes back to you with changes addressing your issues in some way, how would you decide if they have done so sufficiently?

    – A Simple Algorithm
    4 hours ago






  • 1





    @ASimpleAlgorithm perhaps that is why some papers have more than one review cycle...

    – Solar Mike
    3 hours ago






  • 3





    @ASimpleAlgorithm It is much easier to check that a proposed solution is correct, than to come up with it in the first place.

    – Federico Poloni
    3 hours ago












  • @FedericoPoloni that isn't universally true. For example, the proposed solution may be wrong (hence there are very many extremely easy options) whereas the problem of determining if it is correct may be ill-posed or intractable. But my question wasn't necessarily rhetorical. In the kinds of problems you are thinking of, that knowledge of how to determine if a solution is correct can be used to provide guidance or requirements for the authors then when asking for revisions, rather than simply pointing out a shortcoming.

    – A Simple Algorithm
    2 hours ago











  • @FedericoPoloni This is basically what the P vs NP problem in computer science is about. :)

    – David Richerby
    1 hour ago















5















As a peer reviewer, I sometimes feel there are issues in the manuscript but I'm not sure how they should be corrected/addressed, partly due to my inadequate expertise in those exact issues.



I also sometimes find some words/terms are incorrectly used, but as a non-native speaker I can't easily suggest alternatives.



Should I just point to such issues anyway, or ignore them since I couldn't suggest solutions?










share|improve this question

















  • 1





    If it ends us as a major revision that comes back to you with changes addressing your issues in some way, how would you decide if they have done so sufficiently?

    – A Simple Algorithm
    4 hours ago






  • 1





    @ASimpleAlgorithm perhaps that is why some papers have more than one review cycle...

    – Solar Mike
    3 hours ago






  • 3





    @ASimpleAlgorithm It is much easier to check that a proposed solution is correct, than to come up with it in the first place.

    – Federico Poloni
    3 hours ago












  • @FedericoPoloni that isn't universally true. For example, the proposed solution may be wrong (hence there are very many extremely easy options) whereas the problem of determining if it is correct may be ill-posed or intractable. But my question wasn't necessarily rhetorical. In the kinds of problems you are thinking of, that knowledge of how to determine if a solution is correct can be used to provide guidance or requirements for the authors then when asking for revisions, rather than simply pointing out a shortcoming.

    – A Simple Algorithm
    2 hours ago











  • @FedericoPoloni This is basically what the P vs NP problem in computer science is about. :)

    – David Richerby
    1 hour ago













5












5








5








As a peer reviewer, I sometimes feel there are issues in the manuscript but I'm not sure how they should be corrected/addressed, partly due to my inadequate expertise in those exact issues.



I also sometimes find some words/terms are incorrectly used, but as a non-native speaker I can't easily suggest alternatives.



Should I just point to such issues anyway, or ignore them since I couldn't suggest solutions?










share|improve this question














As a peer reviewer, I sometimes feel there are issues in the manuscript but I'm not sure how they should be corrected/addressed, partly due to my inadequate expertise in those exact issues.



I also sometimes find some words/terms are incorrectly used, but as a non-native speaker I can't easily suggest alternatives.



Should I just point to such issues anyway, or ignore them since I couldn't suggest solutions?







peer-review






share|improve this question













share|improve this question











share|improve this question




share|improve this question










asked 4 hours ago









OrionOrion

2,57212542




2,57212542







  • 1





    If it ends us as a major revision that comes back to you with changes addressing your issues in some way, how would you decide if they have done so sufficiently?

    – A Simple Algorithm
    4 hours ago






  • 1





    @ASimpleAlgorithm perhaps that is why some papers have more than one review cycle...

    – Solar Mike
    3 hours ago






  • 3





    @ASimpleAlgorithm It is much easier to check that a proposed solution is correct, than to come up with it in the first place.

    – Federico Poloni
    3 hours ago












  • @FedericoPoloni that isn't universally true. For example, the proposed solution may be wrong (hence there are very many extremely easy options) whereas the problem of determining if it is correct may be ill-posed or intractable. But my question wasn't necessarily rhetorical. In the kinds of problems you are thinking of, that knowledge of how to determine if a solution is correct can be used to provide guidance or requirements for the authors then when asking for revisions, rather than simply pointing out a shortcoming.

    – A Simple Algorithm
    2 hours ago











  • @FedericoPoloni This is basically what the P vs NP problem in computer science is about. :)

    – David Richerby
    1 hour ago












  • 1





    If it ends us as a major revision that comes back to you with changes addressing your issues in some way, how would you decide if they have done so sufficiently?

    – A Simple Algorithm
    4 hours ago






  • 1





    @ASimpleAlgorithm perhaps that is why some papers have more than one review cycle...

    – Solar Mike
    3 hours ago






  • 3





    @ASimpleAlgorithm It is much easier to check that a proposed solution is correct, than to come up with it in the first place.

    – Federico Poloni
    3 hours ago












  • @FedericoPoloni that isn't universally true. For example, the proposed solution may be wrong (hence there are very many extremely easy options) whereas the problem of determining if it is correct may be ill-posed or intractable. But my question wasn't necessarily rhetorical. In the kinds of problems you are thinking of, that knowledge of how to determine if a solution is correct can be used to provide guidance or requirements for the authors then when asking for revisions, rather than simply pointing out a shortcoming.

    – A Simple Algorithm
    2 hours ago











  • @FedericoPoloni This is basically what the P vs NP problem in computer science is about. :)

    – David Richerby
    1 hour ago







1




1





If it ends us as a major revision that comes back to you with changes addressing your issues in some way, how would you decide if they have done so sufficiently?

– A Simple Algorithm
4 hours ago





If it ends us as a major revision that comes back to you with changes addressing your issues in some way, how would you decide if they have done so sufficiently?

– A Simple Algorithm
4 hours ago




1




1





@ASimpleAlgorithm perhaps that is why some papers have more than one review cycle...

– Solar Mike
3 hours ago





@ASimpleAlgorithm perhaps that is why some papers have more than one review cycle...

– Solar Mike
3 hours ago




3




3





@ASimpleAlgorithm It is much easier to check that a proposed solution is correct, than to come up with it in the first place.

– Federico Poloni
3 hours ago






@ASimpleAlgorithm It is much easier to check that a proposed solution is correct, than to come up with it in the first place.

– Federico Poloni
3 hours ago














@FedericoPoloni that isn't universally true. For example, the proposed solution may be wrong (hence there are very many extremely easy options) whereas the problem of determining if it is correct may be ill-posed or intractable. But my question wasn't necessarily rhetorical. In the kinds of problems you are thinking of, that knowledge of how to determine if a solution is correct can be used to provide guidance or requirements for the authors then when asking for revisions, rather than simply pointing out a shortcoming.

– A Simple Algorithm
2 hours ago





@FedericoPoloni that isn't universally true. For example, the proposed solution may be wrong (hence there are very many extremely easy options) whereas the problem of determining if it is correct may be ill-posed or intractable. But my question wasn't necessarily rhetorical. In the kinds of problems you are thinking of, that knowledge of how to determine if a solution is correct can be used to provide guidance or requirements for the authors then when asking for revisions, rather than simply pointing out a shortcoming.

– A Simple Algorithm
2 hours ago













@FedericoPoloni This is basically what the P vs NP problem in computer science is about. :)

– David Richerby
1 hour ago





@FedericoPoloni This is basically what the P vs NP problem in computer science is about. :)

– David Richerby
1 hour ago










3 Answers
3






active

oldest

votes


















5














Does "peer review" mean you have to re-write the material, or just point out where the flaws may be and the author is meant to sort them?



I suggest it is the latter, so point them out and expect the author to edit / correct or justify what they meant.






share|improve this answer
































    2














    Yes, you should point them out. You should point out solutions to problems when you know what the solution is but, at the end of the day, it's the authors' responsibility to write their paper, not yours.






    share|improve this answer






























      0














      A story (and many other intersting ones) I once heard from an editorial board member of Physical Review Letters, who gave an overview talk on the editorial process of that journal at a conference, was that sometimes it happens that the reviewer switches sides and becomes a collaborator of the authors they reviewed initially.



      While at first this sound strange (certainly did to me at that time as a young PhD student), I think this is more appropriate then outlining new solutions (which is nice but not necessary) the authors did not think of. I also don't think 1-2 major revisions are a good spot to discuss/recommend in-depth new solutions to a manuscript. It's common to request further data analysis/evaluation or additional measurements. But if there are major flaws in the manuscript/methodology, you should point to it, but personally I would advise/vote then to reject the manuscript for this reason.



      Concerning grammar and language mistakes: The associate editor can reject publication of a manuscript, even if the peer reviewer don't vote for further revisions (due to content or language level). It's not your duty to improve the language and associate editors regulary recommend commercial english editing services, when the language level is below the standards of the journal. Personally, if I see a lot of spelling and grammar mistakes, I don't point the authors to every single one, I mention 2 or 3 to the editor and the rest is his job, not mine, especially if the manuscript is multi-authored.






      share|improve this answer























        Your Answer








        StackExchange.ready(function()
        var channelOptions =
        tags: "".split(" "),
        id: "415"
        ;
        initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

        StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
        // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
        if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
        StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
        createEditor();
        );

        else
        createEditor();

        );

        function createEditor()
        StackExchange.prepareEditor(
        heartbeatType: 'answer',
        autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
        convertImagesToLinks: true,
        noModals: true,
        showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
        reputationToPostImages: 10,
        bindNavPrevention: true,
        postfix: "",
        imageUploader:
        brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
        contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
        allowUrls: true
        ,
        noCode: true, onDemand: true,
        discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
        ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
        );



        );













        draft saved

        draft discarded


















        StackExchange.ready(
        function ()
        StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2facademia.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f128469%2fpointing-to-problems-without-suggesting-solutions%23new-answer', 'question_page');

        );

        Post as a guest















        Required, but never shown

























        3 Answers
        3






        active

        oldest

        votes








        3 Answers
        3






        active

        oldest

        votes









        active

        oldest

        votes






        active

        oldest

        votes









        5














        Does "peer review" mean you have to re-write the material, or just point out where the flaws may be and the author is meant to sort them?



        I suggest it is the latter, so point them out and expect the author to edit / correct or justify what they meant.






        share|improve this answer





























          5














          Does "peer review" mean you have to re-write the material, or just point out where the flaws may be and the author is meant to sort them?



          I suggest it is the latter, so point them out and expect the author to edit / correct or justify what they meant.






          share|improve this answer



























            5












            5








            5







            Does "peer review" mean you have to re-write the material, or just point out where the flaws may be and the author is meant to sort them?



            I suggest it is the latter, so point them out and expect the author to edit / correct or justify what they meant.






            share|improve this answer















            Does "peer review" mean you have to re-write the material, or just point out where the flaws may be and the author is meant to sort them?



            I suggest it is the latter, so point them out and expect the author to edit / correct or justify what they meant.







            share|improve this answer














            share|improve this answer



            share|improve this answer








            edited 2 hours ago









            Buzz

            15.5k94979




            15.5k94979










            answered 4 hours ago









            Solar MikeSolar Mike

            15.8k62755




            15.8k62755





















                2














                Yes, you should point them out. You should point out solutions to problems when you know what the solution is but, at the end of the day, it's the authors' responsibility to write their paper, not yours.






                share|improve this answer



























                  2














                  Yes, you should point them out. You should point out solutions to problems when you know what the solution is but, at the end of the day, it's the authors' responsibility to write their paper, not yours.






                  share|improve this answer

























                    2












                    2








                    2







                    Yes, you should point them out. You should point out solutions to problems when you know what the solution is but, at the end of the day, it's the authors' responsibility to write their paper, not yours.






                    share|improve this answer













                    Yes, you should point them out. You should point out solutions to problems when you know what the solution is but, at the end of the day, it's the authors' responsibility to write their paper, not yours.







                    share|improve this answer












                    share|improve this answer



                    share|improve this answer










                    answered 58 mins ago









                    David RicherbyDavid Richerby

                    30.4k662126




                    30.4k662126





















                        0














                        A story (and many other intersting ones) I once heard from an editorial board member of Physical Review Letters, who gave an overview talk on the editorial process of that journal at a conference, was that sometimes it happens that the reviewer switches sides and becomes a collaborator of the authors they reviewed initially.



                        While at first this sound strange (certainly did to me at that time as a young PhD student), I think this is more appropriate then outlining new solutions (which is nice but not necessary) the authors did not think of. I also don't think 1-2 major revisions are a good spot to discuss/recommend in-depth new solutions to a manuscript. It's common to request further data analysis/evaluation or additional measurements. But if there are major flaws in the manuscript/methodology, you should point to it, but personally I would advise/vote then to reject the manuscript for this reason.



                        Concerning grammar and language mistakes: The associate editor can reject publication of a manuscript, even if the peer reviewer don't vote for further revisions (due to content or language level). It's not your duty to improve the language and associate editors regulary recommend commercial english editing services, when the language level is below the standards of the journal. Personally, if I see a lot of spelling and grammar mistakes, I don't point the authors to every single one, I mention 2 or 3 to the editor and the rest is his job, not mine, especially if the manuscript is multi-authored.






                        share|improve this answer



























                          0














                          A story (and many other intersting ones) I once heard from an editorial board member of Physical Review Letters, who gave an overview talk on the editorial process of that journal at a conference, was that sometimes it happens that the reviewer switches sides and becomes a collaborator of the authors they reviewed initially.



                          While at first this sound strange (certainly did to me at that time as a young PhD student), I think this is more appropriate then outlining new solutions (which is nice but not necessary) the authors did not think of. I also don't think 1-2 major revisions are a good spot to discuss/recommend in-depth new solutions to a manuscript. It's common to request further data analysis/evaluation or additional measurements. But if there are major flaws in the manuscript/methodology, you should point to it, but personally I would advise/vote then to reject the manuscript for this reason.



                          Concerning grammar and language mistakes: The associate editor can reject publication of a manuscript, even if the peer reviewer don't vote for further revisions (due to content or language level). It's not your duty to improve the language and associate editors regulary recommend commercial english editing services, when the language level is below the standards of the journal. Personally, if I see a lot of spelling and grammar mistakes, I don't point the authors to every single one, I mention 2 or 3 to the editor and the rest is his job, not mine, especially if the manuscript is multi-authored.






                          share|improve this answer

























                            0












                            0








                            0







                            A story (and many other intersting ones) I once heard from an editorial board member of Physical Review Letters, who gave an overview talk on the editorial process of that journal at a conference, was that sometimes it happens that the reviewer switches sides and becomes a collaborator of the authors they reviewed initially.



                            While at first this sound strange (certainly did to me at that time as a young PhD student), I think this is more appropriate then outlining new solutions (which is nice but not necessary) the authors did not think of. I also don't think 1-2 major revisions are a good spot to discuss/recommend in-depth new solutions to a manuscript. It's common to request further data analysis/evaluation or additional measurements. But if there are major flaws in the manuscript/methodology, you should point to it, but personally I would advise/vote then to reject the manuscript for this reason.



                            Concerning grammar and language mistakes: The associate editor can reject publication of a manuscript, even if the peer reviewer don't vote for further revisions (due to content or language level). It's not your duty to improve the language and associate editors regulary recommend commercial english editing services, when the language level is below the standards of the journal. Personally, if I see a lot of spelling and grammar mistakes, I don't point the authors to every single one, I mention 2 or 3 to the editor and the rest is his job, not mine, especially if the manuscript is multi-authored.






                            share|improve this answer













                            A story (and many other intersting ones) I once heard from an editorial board member of Physical Review Letters, who gave an overview talk on the editorial process of that journal at a conference, was that sometimes it happens that the reviewer switches sides and becomes a collaborator of the authors they reviewed initially.



                            While at first this sound strange (certainly did to me at that time as a young PhD student), I think this is more appropriate then outlining new solutions (which is nice but not necessary) the authors did not think of. I also don't think 1-2 major revisions are a good spot to discuss/recommend in-depth new solutions to a manuscript. It's common to request further data analysis/evaluation or additional measurements. But if there are major flaws in the manuscript/methodology, you should point to it, but personally I would advise/vote then to reject the manuscript for this reason.



                            Concerning grammar and language mistakes: The associate editor can reject publication of a manuscript, even if the peer reviewer don't vote for further revisions (due to content or language level). It's not your duty to improve the language and associate editors regulary recommend commercial english editing services, when the language level is below the standards of the journal. Personally, if I see a lot of spelling and grammar mistakes, I don't point the authors to every single one, I mention 2 or 3 to the editor and the rest is his job, not mine, especially if the manuscript is multi-authored.







                            share|improve this answer












                            share|improve this answer



                            share|improve this answer










                            answered 15 mins ago









                            user847982user847982

                            1,165412




                            1,165412



























                                draft saved

                                draft discarded
















































                                Thanks for contributing an answer to Academia Stack Exchange!


                                • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

                                But avoid


                                • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

                                • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.

                                To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




                                draft saved


                                draft discarded














                                StackExchange.ready(
                                function ()
                                StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2facademia.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f128469%2fpointing-to-problems-without-suggesting-solutions%23new-answer', 'question_page');

                                );

                                Post as a guest















                                Required, but never shown





















































                                Required, but never shown














                                Required, but never shown












                                Required, but never shown







                                Required, but never shown

































                                Required, but never shown














                                Required, but never shown












                                Required, but never shown







                                Required, but never shown







                                Popular posts from this blog

                                Ружовы пелікан Змест Знешні выгляд | Пашырэнне | Асаблівасці біялогіі | Літаратура | НавігацыяДагледжаная версіяправерана1 зменаДагледжаная версіяправерана1 змена/ 22697590 Сістэматыкана ВіківідахВыявына Вікісховішчы174693363011049382

                                ValueError: Error when checking input: expected conv2d_13_input to have shape (3, 150, 150) but got array with shape (150, 150, 3)2019 Community Moderator ElectionError when checking : expected dense_1_input to have shape (None, 5) but got array with shape (200, 1)Error 'Expected 2D array, got 1D array instead:'ValueError: Error when checking input: expected lstm_41_input to have 3 dimensions, but got array with shape (40000,100)ValueError: Error when checking target: expected dense_1 to have shape (7,) but got array with shape (1,)ValueError: Error when checking target: expected dense_2 to have shape (1,) but got array with shape (0,)Keras exception: ValueError: Error when checking input: expected conv2d_1_input to have shape (150, 150, 3) but got array with shape (256, 256, 3)Steps taking too long to completewhen checking input: expected dense_1_input to have shape (13328,) but got array with shape (317,)ValueError: Error when checking target: expected dense_3 to have shape (None, 1) but got array with shape (7715, 40000)Keras exception: Error when checking input: expected dense_input to have shape (2,) but got array with shape (1,)

                                Illegal assignment from SObject to ContactFetching String, Id from Map - Illegal Assignment Id to Field / ObjectError: Compile Error: Illegal assignment from String to BooleanError: List has no rows for assignment to SObjectError on Test Class - System.QueryException: List has no rows for assignment to SObjectRemote action problemDML requires SObject or SObject list type error“Illegal assignment from List to List”Test Class Fail: Batch Class: System.QueryException: List has no rows for assignment to SObjectMapping to a user'List has no rows for assignment to SObject' Mystery