Analyzing massively collaborative mathematics projects (Q536600): Difference between revisions

This paper is mainly concerned with the role of massively collaborative mathematical research projects. It seems that the key role here is now played by the Polymath Project, the administrators of its blog being Timothy Gowers, Gil Kalai, Michael Nielsen, and Terence Tao. Due to these efforts, it seems quite possible that polymath projects may attract a wider public to mathematics, and this is a central purpose of this project. The main questions proposed for consideration in the paper under review are the following: {\parindent=5mm \begin{itemize}\item[1.] Can we describe and classify the types of problems that might benefit from a polymath approach? Something like Fermat's Last Theorem presumably could not, for only a handful of people would have the background knowledge necessary to play a meaningful part in a discussion of Fermat's Last Theorem. \item[2.] Of the problems that might attract people to a polymath, which would likely engage an increasing number of them in one discussion, rather than its devolving into a dialogue between a few of them, or breaking up into several disjoint groups? \item[3.] Is a blog the best mechanism for conducting a polymath? \item[4.] How can we measure or keep track of the progress in a specific project? \item[5.] How should a polymath decide on attribution in publishing? \end{itemize}} After reading this paper, the conclusion is that taking into account the interest that aroused in the community, there is reason enough to encourage more polymath projects.