1
$\begingroup$

The DSP literature increases steadily with more or less useful papers. Sometime, a potential promising ideas get little notice. It could be that the paper (if not obviously wrong) has not reached its target audience. For instance an algorithm designed for images, with little added value, could make sense in signal. Or possibly its known applications are poor, or mismatched.

At SE.DSP, there is an audience with wide interests, a lot of applications. While we should avoid opinion-based Q&A:

  • would it be interesting to expose an idea from a published source?
  • could we ask whether somebody has tried similar stuff, or know types of data for which the idea could be interesting?

While this is not the main business model for SE, this could enrich the overall knowledge and promote collaborations between users.

$\endgroup$

2 Answers 2

Reset to default
2
$\begingroup$

Provided the information could be posed in a Q&A style format, I think this is OK. It's perfectly OK to answer your own questions, so this might be one case where this is a good idea.

I know I asked a couple of questions that I intended to answer myself to get things moving on this site... but I received too many good answers --- probably better than my own answer --- so I didn't answer my own questions in the end. :-)

$\endgroup$
6
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Here my goal is not to write an answer myself $\endgroup$
    – Laurent Duval
    Commented Aug 23, 2016 at 13:11
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @LaurentDuval : No problem, provided you write the question so as to be answerable here. Some papers are a little high-falutin' for general consumption. :-) $\endgroup$
    – Peter K. Mod
    Commented Aug 23, 2016 at 14:57
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ At least I learned the word 'highfalutin' in the process. Could earn votes at english.stackexchange.com $\endgroup$
    – Laurent Duval
    Commented Aug 23, 2016 at 15:00
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @LaurentDuval : I'm already in the top 2% there this quarter. Go figure. :D $\endgroup$
    – Peter K. Mod
    Commented Aug 23, 2016 at 17:17
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Hey, I am not too far behind $\endgroup$
    – Laurent Duval
    Commented Aug 23, 2016 at 18:24
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @LaurentDuval : Very good! Top 3% this year! :-) $\endgroup$
    – Peter K. Mod
    Commented Aug 23, 2016 at 19:12
1
$\begingroup$

The rules appear to allow such questions if you state them the right way. Quoting Signal Processing Stack Exchange help center:

Some subjective questions are allowed, but “subjective” does not mean “anything goes”. All subjective questions are expected to be constructive. What does that mean? Constructive subjective questions:

  • inspire answers that explain “why” and “how”
  • tend to have long, not short, answers
  • have a constructive, fair, and impartial tone
  • invite sharing experiences over opinions
  • insist that opinion be backed up with facts and references
  • are more than just mindless social fun
$\endgroup$
1
  • $\begingroup$ If you can draw a line between what is objective, and what is subjective, I'll be quite interested :) $\endgroup$
    – Laurent Duval
    Commented Aug 25, 2016 at 21:01

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .