This paper would be an interesting candidate for a visual-data analysis.
That's not so much a criticism of the essay as it is an optimistic not on the power of computers. A good analysis would seemingly communicate 80+ percent of the information with <20% of the words and time. Not only that, but it would most likely drive efficiency benefits for anyone looking at the next N+1 sample. While I'm not sure what the "market" would bear on this, it would be interesting if researchers and teachers made these types of investments. It seems the number of man-hours spent reviewing literature could be best spend on things that are communicated in writing. (Note: I read the google cache version).
That's not so much a criticism of the essay as it is an optimistic not on the power of computers. A good analysis would seemingly communicate 80+ percent of the information with <20% of the words and time. Not only that, but it would most likely drive efficiency benefits for anyone looking at the next N+1 sample. While I'm not sure what the "market" would bear on this, it would be interesting if researchers and teachers made these types of investments. It seems the number of man-hours spent reviewing literature could be best spend on things that are communicated in writing. (Note: I read the google cache version).