• Register
PhysicsOverflow is a next-generation academic platform for physicists and astronomers, including a community peer review system and a postgraduate-level discussion forum analogous to MathOverflow.

Welcome to PhysicsOverflow! PhysicsOverflow is an open platform for community peer review and graduate-level Physics discussion.

Please help promote PhysicsOverflow ads elsewhere if you like it.


PO is now at the Physics Department of Bielefeld University!

New printer friendly PO pages!

Migration to Bielefeld University was successful!

Please vote for this year's PhysicsOverflow ads!

Please do help out in categorising submissions. Submit a paper to PhysicsOverflow!

... see more

Tools for paper authors

Submit paper
Claim Paper Authorship

Tools for SE users

Search User
Reclaim SE Account
Request Account Merger
Nativise imported posts
Claim post (deleted users)
Import SE post

Users whose questions have been imported from Physics Stack Exchange, Theoretical Physics Stack Exchange, or any other Stack Exchange site are kindly requested to reclaim their account and not to register as a new user.

Public \(\beta\) tools

Report a bug with a feature
Request a new functionality
404 page design
Send feedback


(propose a free ad)

Site Statistics

205 submissions , 163 unreviewed
5,075 questions , 2,226 unanswered
5,348 answers , 22,757 comments
1,470 users with positive rep
818 active unimported users
More ...

  Reputation for research level questions

+ 2 like - 1 dislike

I am reminded now of the problems with research-level Q&A. There are questions which are answered in a relatively straightforward way, and these distort the truly difficult questions, which are those where the information is specialized, so that only  a few people really know the answer. The reputation gain from answering easy questions always swamps the reputation gain from difficult research-level questions.

For reviews, the idea was to have two criteria, originality and correctness. Perhaps for questions, we should have two criteria too: "Researchiness" and "quality". The "researchiness" is the difficulty level, and the answers to difficult questions can come with exponentially more weight than the easy ones.

I would like to keep graduate level questions, but a question like "Why is G/H a manifold?" which is just a matter of shuffling definitions around, needs to be answered with a very small rep gain from both question and answer, as compared to questions about unsolved problem in fractional spin particles, which takes a heck of a lot more effort, and needs to give the questioner and answerer exponentially more reputation.

If you don't have "difficulty amplification", you will have a site dominated by low-level nonsense, rather than research questions, I think.

In this way, I think you can accomodate both kinds of questions, grad-level (with low researchiness) and professional level (high researchiness), and allow the community to determine researchiness by voting.

The mechanism is exactly the same as for reviews, and the scoring can be the same: exp((researchiness)^1/3 * quality), so that we don't punish good low-level questions, but we mark them as low-level.

Then professionals can choose read only the questions with positive researchiness score. It's an idea, but I am already worried from our first handful of questions that the site will not be professional level, and I don't want to delete low-level questions, simply to mark them as easier.

asked Apr 5, 2014 in Discussion by Ron Maimon (7,730 points) [ no revision ]
retagged Apr 6, 2014 by dimension10

Why don't we wait and see if research-level questions get naturally upvoted more? I think they will, and then we wouldn't need this mechanism in Q&A.  

Ok, might work. But I can tell you that this problem occurs on math overflow, and has to some extent driven away researchers in later years. The site tends to get dominated by middle-of-the-road stuff, with some notable exceptions in very arcane fields.

Your answer

Please use answers only to (at least partly) answer questions. To comment, discuss, or ask for clarification, leave a comment instead.
To mask links under text, please type your text, highlight it, and click the "link" button. You can then enter your link URL.
Please consult the FAQ for as to how to format your post.
This is the answer box; if you want to write a comment instead, please use the 'add comment' button.
Live preview (may slow down editor)   Preview
Your name to display (optional):
Privacy: Your email address will only be used for sending these notifications.
Anti-spam verification:
If you are a human please identify the position of the character covered by the symbol $\varnothing$ in the following word:
Then drag the red bullet below over the corresponding character of our banner. When you drop it there, the bullet changes to green (on slow internet connections after a few seconds).
Please complete the anti-spam verification

user contributions licensed under cc by-sa 3.0 with attribution required

Your rights