= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
LessWrong help desk - free paper downloads and more
Over the last year, VincentYu, gwern, myself and others have provided 132 academic papers for the LessWrong community (out of 152 requests, a 87% success rate) through the Free research, editing and articles thread. We originally intended to provide editing, research and general troubleshooting help, but article downloads are by far the most requested service.
If you're doing a LessWrong relevant project we want to help you. If you need help accessing a journal article or academic book chapter, we can get it for you. If you need some research or writing help, we can help there too.
Turnaround times for articles published in the last 20 years or so is usually less than a day. Older articles often take a couple days.
Please make new article requests in the comment section of this thread.
If you would like to help out with finding papers, please monitor this thread for requests. If you want to monitor via RSS like I do, Google Reader will give you the comment feed if you give it the URL for this thread (or use this link directly).
If you have some special skills you want to volunteer, mention them in the comment section.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d){kind=logo}
Comments (734)
Currently outstanding requests:
When the only constant is change.
NEO Personality Inventory-Revised (NEO-PI-R) and Raven's Advanced Progressive Matrices (APM)
The effect of iodine supplementation on cognition of mildly iodine deficient young New Zealand adults.
(Found) Ruddick, William. 1980. “Concluding note.” In Philosophers in Medical Centers, edited by William Ruddick, 81–2. New York: Society for Philosophy and Public Affairs. OCLC:7424036
(Found) Hooper, Edward. 1999. “The quieting of Louis Pascal.” In The River: A Journey to the Source of HIV and AIDS, 365–74. Boston, MA: Little, Brown and Co. OCLC:39905078
(Found) Pascal, Louis. 1986. “Judgement day.” In Applied Ethics, edited by Peter Singer, 105–24. Oxford: Oxford University Press. OCLC:13820779
A number of old AI papers
Machine consciousness: plausible idea or semantic distortion?
(Found) Zadeh (1950), Thinking Machines, A New Field in Electrical Engineering.
Please respond to these under the original request (linked).
Papers 4-6 have already been found.
Paper 9 has just been posted.
http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/13546780442000150
Here
I have subscriptions to both ACM and IEEE. Just sayin'.
Good to know!
I note, by the way, that /r/scholar is also an excellent place to ask for papers. I've seen (and had) requests I thought near-impossible answered within an hour.
Jensen, Arthur R., Giftedness and genius: Crucial differences.
(Please note that this request is not particularly urgent or important; it probably deserves a lower priority than most other requests.)
I've requested a scan from my library.
Thanks!
Here.
Wow, that was fast! Thanks so much!
I have a big library of about 5,000 pdf's, with books (including textbooks) and papers in philosophy, psychology, statistics, computer science and a few other areas. The library is about 18 GB in size. If folks here can think of an easy way of sharing this material, I'd be happy to make it publicly available.
Google drive. It can be set so that a folder is only available to someone if you send them the link. If there isn't enough room on one account, make a couple different accounts and separate them by subject.
Thanks. Unfortunately Google Drive offers 5 GB of space only. Yes, in principle I could create four different accounts, but in practice this would be a hassle, since ideally I would want to keep the library updated and this would require me to switch accounts frequently. It would also be harder for visitors to access the material, since I really lack the time to sort thousands of files into separate subjects. I might consider this approach if there are no other options, but I'd strongly prefer to upload all the files to a single account.
A possible alternative: I could send people here invites to Dropbox and earn additional storage space. If sufficient folks sign up (~25), this would provide me with enough space to upload all of this material.
I haven't gotten round to signing up for Dropbox. Hit me up.
Invite sent.
Same here.
Invite sent.
(I just noticed that Dropbox gives additional storage space to both the person sending and the person receiving the invite. So you'll get an extra .5GB.)
Sure. How does that work? I use dropbox but never before for anything like that.
BitTorrent. A bit torrent with all papers and books shared for free on LW ever would be really neat especially if we had people share private collections.
Good idea. I just created a torrent file. I̶t̶'̶s̶ ̶u̶n̶c̶o̶m̶p̶r̶e̶s̶s̶e̶d̶ ̶s̶o̶ ̶t̶h̶a̶t̶ ̶y̶o̶u̶ ̶c̶a̶n̶ ̶p̶i̶c̶k̶ ̶w̶h̶i̶c̶h̶ ̶P̶D̶F̶'̶s̶ ̶t̶o̶ ̶d̶o̶w̶n̶l̶o̶a̶d̶,̶ ̶i̶n̶ ̶c̶a̶s̶e̶ ̶y̶o̶u̶ ̶d̶o̶n̶'̶t̶ ̶t̶o̶ ̶d̶o̶w̶n̶l̶o̶a̶d̶ ̶t̶h̶e̶ ̶w̶h̶o̶l̶e̶ ̶l̶i̶b̶r̶a̶r̶y̶. (It's now a compressed zip file; see update below.) Here's the magnet URI:
magnet:?xt=urn:btih:1D845DB543FFF3DE83B66FAA595F1A3D9F42ED42&dn=Library.zip&tr=udp%3a//tracker.openbittorrent.com%3a80/announce
Please note that many (~40%) of the books and articles included here were given to me by several different friends over the past few years. So although the stuff you own does say a lot about you, I'd like to ask those who decide to download this material to kindly abstain from making any strong inferences (flattering or unflattering) about me from the list of items in my library. ;-)
I hope to keep seeding indefinitely, but I can't guarantee this for the long term. So please seed, too, if you can.
One final thing: if you have a large library of files yourself, please consider sharing it with us!
UPDATE: the torrent became corrupted when I added new files to the directory (which I do regularly, since my library is constantly expanding). So I created a new torrent with a zipped file of the library at its current state. You won't be able to pick which pdfs to download, but at least the torrent will not become corrupted again. The magnet URI changed, so make sure you have the updated version, posted above.
2nd UPDATE: there are now two separate torrents; see here for details.
Could you please resume seeding this library so that I can download it and help? This seems potentially useful.
Please update the magnet URI. Let me know if you are still encountering problems.
There are no seeds during the day (Australian time). And then I leave my computer on overnight and it only downloads an extra couple of percent. downloading at about 4kB/sec. Unlikely to be a problem on my end. Would be keen for increased seeding of this. And then I can split up the file, pick the good parts and then repackage it in a new LW/rationality torrent. :/ Just as soon as it gets seeded better.
I've now created a separate torrent which allows for selective downloading of individual files. See here.
I'd like to echo other folks' requests for seeds from anyone who has the whole thing. I am currently making very slow progress in discrete spurts in downloading this, at 45%.
Once I have the whole thing I am willing to work on doing something like this for the books in the library and/or support theduffman's proposal by seeding.
I'll keep seeding this indefinitely, so you should be able to download the entire library eventually. However, if you'd like to download specific files, there's now a separate torrent which contains all the files in the original, uncompressed format. See here.
Okay. I wrongly guessed that there was no one who had the whole thing and was seeding.
No seeds, none for a while in fact.
Please update the magnet URI. Let me know if you are still encountering problems.
Downloading at last! Currently running at 4kB/sec ;-) Thank you for this :-)
Is there a way to download individual contents without downloading the whole 15 Gb zip file?
Yes: see here.
I've made a number of updates over the past weeks, so I thought I should write a brief new comment summarizing the material that is now available for download. There are two separate torrent files, both of which contain the entirety of my electronic library, comprising about 4,100 items mostly in pdf format.
One torrent contains all the files uncompressed. You can see the contents of the library and select specific files for downloading. Magnet URI:
magnet:?xt=urn:btih:BEDDF7A5647B634C179EA68EBBBAAA80967D9D1D&dn=LessWrong&tr=udp%3a%2f%2ftracker.openbittorrent.com%3a80%2fannounce&tr=udp%3a%2f%2ftracker.publicbt.com%3a80%2fannounce
The other torrent contains a single, compressed file, which is about 20% smaller in size. Choose this one if you want to download the entire library. Magnet URI:
magnet:?xt=urn:btih:1D845DB543FFF3DE83B66FAA595F1A3D9F42ED42&dn=Library.zip&tr=udp%3a//tracker.openbittorrent.com%3a80/announce
Thanks a lot!
For the editing. How could I sign up to help? I don't have the skills in research yet, but I am decent at writing and could help.
Thanks for the offer Michelle! Either 1 - monitor these comments and wait for someone to ask for help (I use RSS to do that) or 2 - I can remember that you offered to help and can let you know when someone offers.
Unfortunately, we've only had a few requests for that kind of help. I might use it in a while, though.
Both. Chances are at some point I will forget.
Cool. Will do.
Churchland, Paul M., State-space Semantics and Meaning Holism in Philosophy and Phenomenological Research JStor Philosophy Documentation Center
Here.
PDFs of the following books are available upon request (I will likely send you a link by next business day):
Kahnemann, Slovic, Tversky, eds. (1982) Judgment under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases
Howson & Urbach (2006) Scientific Reasoning: The Bayesian Approach 3rd ed.
Thaler & Sunstein (2008) Nudge
Elliott Sober (2008) Evidence and Evolution
Huw Price (1997) Time's Arrow and Archimedes' Point
James Stewart (2011) Calculus: Early Transcendentals 7th ed.
Craig & Moreland, eds. (2009) The Blackwell Companion to Natural Theology
Jordan Howard Sobel (2009) Logic and Theism
Graham Oppy (2006) Arguing About Gods
Neil A. Manson, ed. (2003) God and Design: The Teleological Argument and Modern Science
Madigan et al. (2010) Brock Biology of Microorganisms 13th ed.
"Cognitive effects of two nutraceuticals Ginseng and Bacopa benchmarked against modafinil: a review and comparison of effect sizes"
Here.
Thanks.
Kiefer, Introduction to Statistical Inference.
Did not have access.
Thanks anyway!
I need some guidance with a problem in the calculus of variations. I want to use direct methods to prove the existence of a minimizer of a certain functional, but I don't really know what I'm doing. If anyone with expertise is reading, I've given a full description at MathOverflow.
I think Minimax methods in critical point theory with applications to differential equations by Paul Rabinowitz might help me out.
You can download the book here.
Thanks!
http://www.springerlink.com/content/703q7m92v02g0037/
(From http://blog.regehr.org/archives/820 )
Here.
Thanks.
I'm looking for a thesis by Bullock 2007, "Experiments on partisanship and public opinion: Party cues, false beliefs, and Bayesian updating" (may be accessible via Proquest).
I'm interested in it because I've come up with a Bayesian justification of the backfire effect, but it seems like Bullock may have covered it already in the last section. ;_;
EDIT: He did some interesting stuff in "Part 3, Bayesian Updating of Political Beliefs: Normative and Descriptive Properties", but not exactly what I have in mind.
Here.
Thanks!
Computer-related accidental death: an empirical exploration (referenced in Hoare 1996; curiously, Google Scholar didn't show me any extensions or replications of the survey, at least since 2000. A gap in the literature, perhaps.)
Requested.
here
Thanks.
Value relations revisited.
here ya go
Thanks!
This one is a challenge.
I'd like to do a stylometrics analysis of the 2009 leaked live-action Death Note movie script, ostensibly by the Parlapanides brothers (an expansion of my old short essay on its authorship). The only other public writing I know of by them is the 2000 movie Everything For A Reason and the 2011 movie Immortals. I've found subtitles for Immortals without a problem, but I've been entirely unable to find any script or screenplay for either (an no subs for Everything For A Reason). Can anyone find it?
http://journals.cambridge.org/action/displayAbstract?fromPage=online&aid=8456131
Here.
Thanks!
"Plasticity of executive functioning in young and older adults: Immediate training gains, transfer, and long-term maintenance", Dahlin 2008. (I should have been able to get this through UWash, but something kept going wrong in the connection.)
Here.
Thanks.
Requested.
Finally, Here
Thanks!
I would be happy to be able to read Procrastination and the five-factor model: a facet level analysis ScienceDirect IngentaConnect (I'm not sure if adding these links helps you guys, but here they are anyways)
The links help a bit.
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/85192141/2001-watson.pdf
http://mdm.sagepub.com/content/16/1/7.2.extract
Here.
Thanks again!
Fischer Black, "Fact and Fantasy in the Use of Options", Financial Analysts Journal 31, pp36–41, 61–72 (July/August 1975).
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/85192141/1975-black.pdf
Wow that was fast! Thanks a lot!
http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg21628892.900-artificial-intelligence-the-coming-superintelligence.html
Nevermind, got it.
http://muse.jhu.edu/login?auth=0&type=summary&url=/journals/anthropological_quarterly/v085/85.4.farman.html
Here.
On the Way to Intelligence Singularity
Here.
Wow, that was fast! Thank you.
Moore's Law Forever
Here.
Mollick, Ethan. "Establishing Moore's law." Annals of the History of Computing, IEEE 28.3 (2006): 62-75.
Here.
The Mythology of Moore's Law
Here.
The Many Lives of Moore's Law
Here.
Computable surreals anyone?
http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.2307/2586835?uid=3739560&uid=2&uid=4&uid=3739256&sid=21101434675947
Here.
Yay!
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1053811912000353
Here.
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1053811911004964
Here.
Chapter 14 of this book:
http://www.amazon.com/Functional-Magnetic-Resonance-Imaging-Edition/dp/0878932860/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1353328060&sr=8-1&keywords=Huettel+fMRI
PMed.
http://journals.lww.com/jcat/Abstract/2000/01000/Ultra_High_Resolution_Imaging_of_the_Human_Head_at.2.aspx
In a weird format (printed to PDF)
http://espace.library.uq.edu.au/view/UQ:281052
I've requested this through ILL, but I'm not sure if it will work.
Thanks for trying.
ILL was rejected. I think I would try emailing the author. You can also buy it here: http://www.library.uq.edu.au/iad/docdeliv/formlib.html, but that doesn't seem worth it.
I've emailed her.
EDIT: she replied with 2 papers covering half the thesis; a quarter of the thesis was just a replication of a previous study, and the remaining quarter is under peer review as a new paper so she didn't provide it. Satisfactory.
http://www.springerlink.com/content/x4t4894rx241t123/
here
Thanks.
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1540-5915.1991.tb01262.x/abstract
Here.
Goode, P. (2002). Connecting with the reservoir. Australian Petroleum Production and Exploration Association Journal, 42(2).
According to Welsh et al. (2002), this paper estimates that "biases such as anchoring and overconfidence contribute to a US$30 billion/year loss in the oil and gas industry."
Requested.
Here.
Unfortunately, the $30 billion/year loss is not explained and no citation is given:
One possible attack for a citation is, besides the obvious searches for those two figures or looking for related government reports/statistics, is looking for a McKinsey report on that industry written before then; they're widely read but not always cited, and they have industry-wide views because of their prestige and numerous clients.
http://library.iated.org/view/ABZUG2010ECO
Requested.
Sorry, ILL request cancelled because "no library is able to supply this item".
Guess I'll email her.
EDIT: worked.
http://springerlink3.metapress.com/content/y162x6761n123214/
Here.
Thanks.
(If anyone knows a general way to get theses when the obvious download fails, I'd appreciate knowing. They seem pretty hard to get.)
I couldn't access the first thesis.
Second thesis. Hmm... unfortunately, the author ignored the past two decades of research using the Big Five and relied instead on personality typing.
(I think recent theses from most US institutions are available from the ProQuest database. I don't know any general way to get non-US theses.)
Thanks for the second; there's actually a surprising number of papers using MBTI in online education, it's really annoying. I may have to look into converting MBTI to Big Five if I do a meta-analysis.
Yeah, I've had difficulty accessing theses as well. My roommate tells me that the reason is that nobody wants to access them because they're almost always just a set of previously published papers (in many fields you publish 3 papers and staple them together for a thesis). This suggests the alternative of finding the papers that make up the thesis. You'll miss out on the introduction by the author, but they may be a lot easier to get a hold of.
That works sometimes, but not usually for the theses I seem to be interested in - for example, the iodine thesis has no preceding papers or else I would've found those first before running into the thesis.
Interesting. It seems odd that they would publish only in as a thesis given that they have such a reputation for not being read.
I've given up trying to predict people's reactions. Some researchers or post-grads, when I contact them, seem thrilled to answer any questions I have or provide unpublished data; other seem to completely ignore me and as far as I can tell, pretend the thesis never existed. I'll give a recent Evangelion example: http://eva.onegeek.org/pipermail/evangelion/2012-October/007214.html
I reviewed a like >200pg PhD thesis which as far as I can tell has been neither discussed nor cited anywhere online; I excerpt it, praise and criticize parts, point out several specific problems which could be fixed in it or places where new material would add substantially to her discussion, submit it to Reddit where it gets 3 praising comments. Then I ping her on Twitter and... nothing in almost a month despite occasional tweets posted by her.
I don't understand how she could not reply, if only to defend herself: she must have spent years working on the thesis, and given the lack of Google hits, I might be one of maybe 10-20 people in the world to ever read it. If I had spent years working on something and someone sent me such an email, I don't think I could ignore it: I'd be prostrate with joy that someone knowledgeable read it carefully, or I'd be berserk with rage that they would dare do anything but praise it and would reply tearing them a new one. Silence, however, I simply cannot understand.
My hypothesis would be ugh fields.
A month is nothing. Especially if she only just graduated and is busy with post-thesis life.
If you take a topic seriously, if you've just spent several years making the effort to think about it and write about it at levels of rigor far beyond the casual standards of ordinary thought and communication, you may put off responding to someone's questions, precisely because you don't want to lower your standards again, and you don't immediately have the time to answer properly.
No, she was doing it while working as an ESL teacher and still working, according to her tweets. Has had time to continue low-quality anime blogging too.
There is no proper answer to several of my criticisms: she is simply flat out wrong or sloppy. Evangelion is one of the few topics where I acknowledge few peers and fewer superiors, and she is neither.
In that case, perhaps she agrees with your criticisms, but doesn't want to admit to being wrong.
The end result of PhD programs is a degree, and finishing a thesis is instrumental to this.The thesis might end up a sunk cost labor of hate that you just want to forget afterwards, even if it did take years, if you mostly just want the degree. Don't know how much this happens at PhD level.
The bureaucracy involved needs a way to check that the phd candidate is doing decent work (preferably something more objective than the promoter's say-so), and the scientific peer review process can be used for this purpose. Thus, phd candidates are often asked to produce some amount of papers and publish them (sometimes in journals with a specified minimal impact factor). Knowing how much work goes into the production of a paper, and how long the review process can take ( > 6 months is no exception), it would be unreasonable to also expect a fully original thesis. Ideally, but not always, the thesis expands somewhat on the previously-published papers.
http://www.igi-global.com/article/content/72887
Requested.
Here. The image quality is rather poor and some of the figures are unreadable, but the figures are also available from this previous conference paper, which has almost identical content.
Thanks!
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v455/n7213/full/nature07278.html
Here.
http://www.springerlink.com/content/2h47575185725551/
Here.
Thanks!
While doing research for paper I plan to submit for publication, I discovered a talk given by Dr. Glimcher entitled "Neurobiological Evidence of a Cardinal Utility Signal: Implications for Welfare in Political Economy." My paper is on a remarkably similar topic, so it looks like exactly what I'm looking for! However, I cannot find a copy of the lecture online, nor a copy of the sources he used.
Reviewing his publications has gotten me a lot of information, most importantly this 2012 meta-analysis. But the paper doesn't use the term "cardinal utility," so I am unsure if I am supposed to read between the lines or if I am misunderstanding the relevance of the data.
I intend to email him to ask for sources for the lecture and to ask if I'm interpreting his work correctly, but I am unsure how to best do so. Can anyone with experience emailing authors have advice? I'd like to avoid a faux pas.
The Academia Stack Exchange might be a good place to ask this. They had a related question.
http://archpsyc.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx?articleid=1151016
Here.
Thanks.
http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/13501781003756527
Here.
http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/13501781003756493
Here.
http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/1350178X.2012.714149
Here.
Thanks for all these!
I need access to this. Well, really I'd like access to everything here, but I think I would settle for the data in the first link.
Thanks.
Here.
The following data are missing because I had no easy way to export them:
You will need the Beyond 20/20 Professional Browser to view the .ivt files.
Thanks! Do you know of any way to view .ivt files on a Mac without Bootcamp? Google yielded no answers.
Sorry, I don't know.
Anyone have access to this?
http://spp.sagepub.com/content/early/2012/10/02/1948550612461284.full.pdf+html
Thanks.
Here.
Thanks!
http://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007%2F978-3-642-35731-2_3
Here.
Thanks!
I'm not sure how "LessWrong relevant" philosophy of religion is considered to be, but I could use having access to the section on Aquinas from William Lane Craig's book The Cosmological Argument from Plato to Leibniz.
http://prl.aps.org/abstract/PRL/v59/i4/p381_1
You make this so easy for us, luke. Explanation of 1/f noise
Thanks very much!
http://www.nature.com/nrd/journal/v11/n3/full/nrd3681.html
Also, http://lesswrong.com/lw/d90/ijmc_mind_uploading_special_issue_published/81wu
1
Thanks.
"Negative effects of melatonin on depression"; http://europepmc.org/abstract/MED/788529/
GAMBLE, J.L.: Physiological information gained from studies on the life-raft ration. Harvey Lectures, 42, 247-273 (1946).
requested.
Did you get the full version? I took a look earlier and the obvious target behind a paywall apparently is an excerpted version, not the full original lecture.
I did not, but now I have, thanks :)
Thanks!
Quantitative analysis of amino acid oxidation and related gluconeogenesis in humans.
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/85192141/1992-jungas.pdf
Thanks a lot!
Statistical decision functions that minimize the maximum risk
Here.
Many thnaks.... thanks, even.
http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2FBF00169709?LI=true
Here.