Chris Pattison

@chris-pattison.bsky.social

PhD student interested in quantum error correction and quantum fault-tolerance

Conference submissions using LLMs can look plausibly correct on a first pass but have a bug hiding deep in the submission. Generally, I don't think of the review process as adversarial, because the author has probably thought about the proof very carefully. Should we change how we review papers?

Oftentimes, one might write a paper that relies on a bunch (~5-10 pages) of definitions from a different paper. At what point do you say the equivalent of "import otherPaper.definitions"? If it's your own paper, then presumably the original definitions were best?

Also +1, I use it a fair bit now for slides. It's a bit rough in the sense that there's a much smaller body of stack exchange posts for whatever cursed thing you'd like to do, but there's less surprises in the language due to clean separation of code/content

Korbinian Kottmann@qottmann.bsky.social · 2y ago

learned that overleaf is down today, so a good chance to advertise typst.app it's a "new latex" if you will. once you go typst, writing latex (and using overleaf) will feel like ancient technology, so use with caution (in particular if you still depend on latex submissions to journals 😬)