Free research help, editing and article downloads for LessWrong
Update: Please use the most recent thread.
The LW Public Goods Team wants to encourage useful research projects (as well other kinds of projects) for the LW community. If you're interested in doing this kind of work, you might run into a problem that is best solved by good outside assistance. Without assistance you might get discouraged and stop working on the project or never even start it. We want to help you avoid that. Do you
- Not know how to interpret a finding and want help figuring it out?
- Need access to a particular paper and need someone with a library subscription to download it for you?
- Need someone to edit your writing?
- Not even know what you're having trouble with, but you know is that you're stuck and need someone to troubleshoot you?
Then, we want to help!
How do you request such help? For now, I think the best way is to post to the discussion section about your problem. That way other interested people can also provide help and be interested in your research. If you feel uncomfortable doing this, you may post to the public goods team mailing list (lw-public-goods-team@googlegroups.com) or if it's not too long after this was posted, post in the comments.
I personally commit to doing at least 3 hours a week of tasks like these for people doing LessWrong related projects (assuming demand for it; I'll be keeping a log) for at least the next month. Morendil has committed to doing at least an hour of this and atucker has promised to some as well.
Our goal is to find out whether this kind of help is effective and encourages people. If this kind of assistance turns out to be valuable, we'll continue to offer it.
If you would like to volunteer some time (a little or a lot), say so in the comments!
Loading…
Subscribe to RSS Feed
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
Comments (439)
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14622741
Can anyone send me the full text? Thanks in advance
here
thanks!
I've made a new thread with the intent that new requests should go there. I'll probably still fill requests there, but please monitor requests at the new thread if you're helping out.
Richardson, James T. 1991. "Cult/Brainwashing Cases and Freedom of Religion," J. Church & State, 33:1, pp. 55-74.
Here
Thanks.
Legarde, D., Batejat, D., Van Beers, P., Sarafian, D., Pradella,S. (1995). Interest of Modafinil, a New Psychostimulant, During a Sixty-Hour Sleep Deprivation Experiment. Fundamental and Clinical Pharmacology, 9(3), 271-279
Here. Have any of these modafinil papers proven particularly useful? Do you update your modafinil survey?
Thanks.
I update all the time (183 edits since I created it in 20 February 2009), although offhand I couldn't say how many papers I request I then use more precisely than >80%.
Requested.
It's not clear to me whether the offer is to help with any project, for LessWrong articles, or research projects for SI. The title says "for LessWrong" but that may just mean "for any member of LessWrong".
My heuristic is "if it is of interest to LW people then it counts". Does that help? What's your project?
I want to offer assistance, actually, but I'll probably be back here to ask for some later. ;) Here is what I offer:
I know tons about psychology. If there's something you don't know the word for, or don't think has been covered, or are looking for a reference for, I'm an excellent person to ask about that. In addition to knowing a lot about psychology in general (like abnormal psychology), I have also specialized in an arcane area of psychology: gifted adults. I say this is arcane because if you wanted to get a psychology degree that covers gifted adults, the closest degree to that would be developmental psychology, however developmental psychology is focused on children with learning disorders, contains some information about gifted children, and leaves gifted adults out for the most part. Since there were other reasons that getting a degree was not very useful in my case (in addition to them not teaching enough about the population I'm most interested in, even according to an award winning school teacher, school isn't a great way to learn, and I have several learning differences that give me big advantages when learning on my own and big disadvantages when learning in a school environment), I chose to learn independently rather than getting a psychology degree. I don't diagnose or treat anyone, obviously, or claim to be a psychologist, but I can cite and summarize what I've read and suggest perspectives based on my experiences and information. These may be extremely useful.
This knowledge is relevant to LessWrong members for two reasons: 1.) According to the last survey, LessWrong's average IQ is 140. This information may be useful for you guys in understanding yourselves. (I fully intend to do some writing for this group - that's a key reason I joined). 2.) People interested in artificial intelligence may want to know random things about human intelligence.
I normally rely on the internet or on libraries for information, but I also own some books on these topics which may be useful if look-ups are needed.
I don't think a time commitment is appropriate, as the amount of information I will be asked for is likely to be totally random, resulting in many weeks where nothing is asked for. This will encourage me not to factor in the commitment when I consider how to use my time each week, and that's not a good way to deal with commitments. So, I'll do this on a random basis. As long as the purpose of the research is ethical, I'll be more than happy to look for a way to fit you in with my priorities.
To get my attention, reply to me directly or PM and make it clear that it's about this offer.
I'm certainly happy to have your help. However, this service has come to be used primarily as a library for academic papers. I don't think many people will request your services unless you do a little bit of advertising that you're here. Perhaps make a discussion thread about it.
I'm more than happy to help you out when you need help.
I'm looking for:
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/cjs.5550360409/abstract
http://www.jstor.org/stable/91337
First Second
So awesome.
Thanks, John.
Glad to help :)
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1570868307000857
Here
Thanks!
http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/13546783.2012.713178
Here.
Thanks!
Differential effect of caffeine administration on calcium and vitamin D metabolism in young and adult rats
Requested.
Here.
Downloaded, thanks.
Two resources (I've rot13ed the names and URLs):
Yvoenel Trarfvf (yvotra.bet) – This enormous book repository has been mentioned a few times before on LW. yvotra.bet and tra.yvo.ehf.rp (you need a non-US VPN/proxy to access these) are the official mirrors. A list of mirrors operated by others can be found through Download -> Mirrors (and in the grandchild comment below).
Fpv-Uho (fpv-uho.bet) – This offers proxy access through ~20 different university libraries. It worked well on a few papers that I wasn't able to access otherwise. This should be especially useful if you don't normally have VPN access to a library. (If the current proxy doesn't have access to your paper, just click the refresh icon on the right to switch to another proxy.) Again, looks like you'll need a non-US IP.
Also, I acquired a copy of FineReader and would be happy to OCR any scanned paper or book that you have (I've tried some open-source and free online alternatives and found them lacking). Just leave a comment here as usual.
I will be applying OCR by default to future requests that I receive as scanned documents. This includes some image manipulation (deskewing, contrast enhancing, etc.) and lossy compression (in general, the final product is more readable than the original, despite the compression). Let me know if you don't want these applied and prefer the original un-OCRed scan.
I'm a little confused. The first two links redirect to books.google.com for me. Is that cause I'm in the US? What's the best way to read more about Library Genesis?
Sci-hub.org redirects to myescience.org, is that correct?
o_O Huh. No, I did not anticipate these redirects for the first and third links...
I just found the reason on their forum (can you access this?):
Looks like they want to remain obscure, at least in the US:
Here is the current list of mirrors (rot13ed); I'm pretty sure the 4th and 5th work in the US:
Their IP filter list for yvotra.bet must not be very good because I can access it through my Rochester VPN (I'm in the UK right now).
Yeah, it seems like Fpv-Uho redirects to myescience.org in the US, but that's not the correct site. The site that I see looks like this: imgur.com/XpVa3. I suppose people in the US will need a VPN or proxy to access it. Maybe try the free proxies on proxy.org? (I've been using this paid VPN service for ~1 year without issues, but there are plenty of other commercial alternatives.)
Very interesting. Have you found this site pretty useful above and beyond what your university gives you?
Fpv-Uho is occasionally useful for me. E.g., I was actually unable to access this paper that Gwern requested below through any of my three university VPNs (Rochester, Oxford, Chinese University of Hong Kong), but I managed to grab it off one of the library proxies through Fpv-Uho.
(Yvoenel Trarfvf is obviously useful for anyone who wants to download books.)
"An Introduction to Japanese Society’s Attitudes Toward Race and Skin Color", Debito Arudou
Here. Got it from Fpv-Uho. :D
Thanks.
My request was canceled by ILL staff because it has not been released and/or they couldn't get a hold of it elsewhere. I'll try again in 2 months.
OK, thanks.
Requested.
http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/15027570.2012.708265
Here.
Requested.
per http://lesswrong.com/r/discussion/lw/ej3/scientists_make_monkeys_smarter_using_brain/7g2x
I've added them to the original thread.
Peter Rossi, "The iron law of evaluation and other metallic rules". Research in Social Problems and Public Policy. 1987;4:3–20.
Here.
Thanks.
Requested.
http://www.sciencemag.org/content/331/6018/772.short
here
http://www.computer.org/portal/web/csdl/doi/10.1109/T-AFFC.2012.29
here
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1540-5915.1975.tb01046.x/abstract
Here.
Thanks mucho!
Thanks!
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1747-9991.2012.00504.x/abstract
and
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1747-9991.2012.00503.x/abstract
http://www.sciencemag.org/content/132/3426/555.extract
here
Thanks!
Research into smoking or nicotine and human cognitive performance: does the source of funding make a difference?
Here.
Thanks.
Subjective effects of modafinil, a new central adrenergic stimulant in healthy volunteers: A comparison with amphetamine, caffeine and placebo
Here.
Thanks.
Requested.
"Optimum rehearsal patterns and name learning" pg 625-632; TK Landauer, RA Bjork. In: Practical aspects of memory ed. Gruneberg, 1978 ISBN 0471912344
I'm interested to hear what are your thoughts on Bjork's lab's findings. As I understand, they do recognize spacing effect, but try to make theories beoynd that.
Here.
Wait, I recognize that URL... I assumed it was one of Bjork's later papers or works, like the one I got the original citation from. >.<
I was actually under the same impression from the Google result page, and was pleasantly surprised to find that it was in fact the paper you sought.
http://www.springerlink.com/content/j0ug38722j1w4648/
All five: [1] [2] [3] [4] [5]
Awesome, thanks!
http://www.springerlink.com/content/r0h4k71w7w5n8271/
http://www.springerlink.com/content/l8r6320425q7740t/
http://www.springerlink.com/content/l17880x83r5m1w70/
http://www.springerlink.com/content/t55l7513054213t6/
Here's another paper I've identified as potentially useful, for same project as was mentioned in previous comments:
Shah, Huma; Warwick, Kevin (June 2010), "Hidden Interlocutor Misidentification in Practical Turing Tests", Minds and Machines 20 (3): 441-454
Here.
Thanks!
Looking over this thread, I'm impressed by how many of these requests you've managed to answer.
Does anyone know any other place where we can ask for free ILL requests? I think jsalvatier and I can request only a single chapter out of each book without running into copyright issues, but there are some (out-of-print and as-yet-unpirated) books from which I'd like to get more than two chapters in electronic form. (AFAIK, Reddit's r/scholar doesn't do ILL requests.)
I have a one or two friends who would probably do ILL requests for me.
I seek the following book chapters. Could someone submit ILL requests for me?
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
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
Pascal, Louis. 1986. “Judgement day.” In Applied Ethics, edited by Peter Singer, 105–24. Oxford: Oxford University Press. OCLC:13820779
Requested.
Hey, I got full-book scans of these books, so I won't need these chapters anymore.
Hey Vincent. Would you mind sending me copies of the three papers? (I assume the first two relate to the third, which I read, and liked, a long time ago. If they are unrelated, I'm not that interested.) My name is Pablo Stafforini, and my email address is FirstName@LastName.com, with the obvious substitutions. Thanks!
I was in the works of getting the Quieting of Louis Pascal chapter when this request got canceled. Here's that one, if you still want it.
Vincent kindly sent me all three items already, but thanks anyway.
I've finished reading that chapter, and it's a pretty strange story (the Wikipedia article indicates his AIDS hypothesis is even more refuted these days). Why were you interested in it?
I was interested in that article, which I have yet to read, only because it was authored by Louis Pascal. I'm interested in Pascal because he authored this other article (see here for discussion).
Have you heard back from the library?
Sorry for the long delay here. The issue is that I didn't get e copies of these as I normally do, but instead they placed holds on the books, and I still have to go see if they're available yet. I'm also in SF till the 22nd.
I'll try to work this out when I get back.
No problem, there's no rush. Thanks for doing this. (I've found the third item elsewhere, so please disregard that.)
By the way, would you like to have a skype chat sometime next week? I think it would be interesting to talk, and I'm curious who you are.
Sure. IIRC, my Skype username is (rot13ed) lhivapragr. I actually prefer IM through Gchat, where I can be reached at (rot13ed) nolpwlirl@tznvy.pbz.
Hi everyone,
I'm currently working for the Singularity Institute on a project tracking AI progress over the decades. One section I'm working on is on logistics AI. I'm trying to find information on a program called NONLIN apparently used by the Navy. The paper Russell & Norvig cite as a source on NONLIN is not available free online, far as I can tell:
Tate, A. and Whiter, A. M. (1984). Planning with multiple resource constraints and an application to a naval planning problem_ in Proc. First Conference on AI Application, pp. 410-4 Lb.
If anyone can get me this paper, PM me, and I'll send you my e-mail address. If you happen across other sources with information on NONLIN, that would be appreciated too!
Finally got it
I've submitted an Inter Library Loan request. Should hopefully have it in a couple of days.
I don't have the paper you are trying to find, but here are three pharmaceutical papers on using NONLIN (found via Google Scholar): [1] [2] [3]
ETA: Actually, I think that might be a different NONLIN... It wouldn't surprising for two independently developed nonlinear fitters to be both named NONLIN.
Thanks. Unfortunately, I think that is a different NONLIN - the one I'm looking for handles logistics.
Also useful for a different part of the same project would be
Early, J. 1970. "An efficient context-free parsing algorithm" Communications of the ACM. Vol. 13, No. 2, pp. 94-102.
Here.
http://www.sciencemag.org/content/early/2012/08/15/science.1226355.full.pdf
Here.
Thanks!
www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/13869795.2012.706822
Here.
Thanks!
I'm starting to think it may be time to start a new article; besides being more manageable, one could go through the old one, identify any remaining outstanding requests, and copy them over. As it is, probably no one is going through the old ones because it's too hard to work out which ones haven't been filled...
Also a good excuse to tote up some statistics like '300 papers provided' etc!
I haven't noticed this being unmanageable recently, but I can see it becoming so. I wonder if there is a better solution than another thread though. Bug tracking software (perhaps github) might work well because people can open a request and then once it's found, the thread is hidden.
People don't want to use a separate site; if they did, no one would be using this page because they'd be using the subreddit devoted to this, or the equivalent Wikipedia reference request desk, etc.
This service has mostly turned out to be used by a couple of people. Do you prefer to use LW proper? I was under the impression that this service was mostly valuable because we have access to ILL requests and because we're more interested in helping than elsewhere.
I do, yeah. And it is easier to keep up here.
Hmm, okay. Have you noticed this thread being unwieldy in some way? What is your main concern?
As comments increase, more of the page gets buried in click-to-continue wrappers, so any kind of navigation gets harder. It gets harder for me to refind old requests I might need. It gets harder for anyone to look through for unfilled requests. And so on.
I also don't like pages with too many comments on pure aesthetic grounds. As good a time as any to pull the plug and inaugurate a second article. (Would be good for your karma too, which you deserve!)
Speaking of difficult to navigate, can you navigate me towards your series of comments about studies regarding IQ in societies?
You mean http://lesswrong.com/lw/7e1/rationality_quotes_september_2011/4r01 ?
Yes, thank you :)
Larrick, Morgan, & Nisbett (1990). Teaching the use of cost-benefit reasoning in everyday life. Psychological Science, 1: 362-370.
Here
Anand, P., Durand, M., Heckman J., (2011) The Measurement of progress –some achivements and challenges, Journal of the Royal Statistical Society A, 174, 851-5.
Here
Thanks for these last two!
A model of decision-making involving two information processors. COMPUTATIONAL ECONOMICS, Volume 2, Number 2 (1989), 119-149.
Design of interactive systems—a formal approach International Journal of Man-Machine Studies, Volume 37, Issue 1, July 1992, Pages 23–46.
Requested #1. Here's #2.
Thank you.
First
Second
Thanks.
"Will Working Memory Training Generalize to Improve Off-Task Behavior in Children with Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder?"
Here.
Thanks.
Pietruszkiewicz & Imada, Artificial intelligence evolved from random behaviour: Departure from the state of the art.
Here.
Thanks so much ×3!
Grossman et al., A Route to Well-being: Intelligence vs. Wise Reasoning. (Non-HTML version, please.)
Here.
Yampolskiy, Turing Test as a defining feature of AI-completeness.
Here.
Calibration and probability judgements: Conceptual and methodological issues
The calibration of subjective probability: Theories and models 1980–94.
Here's the second finally.
first
I'll make the request for the second in a while.
The role of motivated reasoning in optimistic time predictions.
Edit: And
The accuracy of cost and duration estimates in industrial R&D.
Estimate accuracy and causes of delay in an engineering research laboratory
First.
Second.
Third.
History, adaptation, Japan: Haruki Murakami's `Tony Takitani' and Jun Ichikawa's Tony Takitani
Here.
Thanks.
Requested.
Inside the planning fallacy
Is the book http://libgen.info/view.php?id=824427 not adequate?
That works.
Learning How to “Make a Deal”: Human (Homo sapiens) and Monkey (Macaca mulatta) Performance When Repeatedly Faced With the Monty Hall Dilemma
(Hilarious-sounding, IMO.)
Bam!
Thanks.
Confirmation bias in a simulated research environment: An experimental study of scientific inference
Varieties of confirmation bias
And this is a stretch but i someone has these two chapters in a convenient format that would be spectacular:
Perkins, D. N., Allen, R., & Hafner, J. (1983). Difficulties in everyday reasoning. In W. Maxwell (Ed.), Thinking: The frontier expands.
and
Perkins, D. N., Farady, M., & Bushey, B. (1991). Everyday reasoning and the roots of intelligence. In J. F. Voss, D. N. Perkins, & J. W. Segal (Eds.), Informal reasoning and education.
Third.
Fourth.
Fast! Thanks.
Second
First.
Requested the other three.
I am interested in obtaining the manuals and test booklets for the following psychometric inventories:
NEO Personality Inventory-Revised (NEO-PI-R)
Publisher's product page.
The NEO-PI-3 and NEO-FFI-3 would also be useful. (The manuals for these three inventories seem to be identical.)
Raven's Advanced Progressive Matrices (APM)
Publisher's product page.
The SPM(+) and CPM would also be useful. (The manuals for these tests are split into several sections/volumes.)
I am not able to buy these inventories from the publishers: the NEO PI-R requires an S-level qualification (certificate, license, or relevant undergraduate degree), while the APM requires a B-level qualification (certification/membership in professional organization or relevant master's degree).
Furthermore, I cannot find any copies of the manuals or test booklets online, so I assume the publishers are serious in suppressing distribution; if you get hold of a copy, PMing me is probably a better idea than posting it publicly.
I would be happy to obtain either the manual or test booklet for any of the aforementioned inventories. (I'd also like to know how I might be able to get these materials, free or otherwise.)
Have you tried interlibrary loan? Lots of university libraries have them.
That's a good idea, thanks.
For people retrieving articles: what is the easiest request format for you? I've been providing links to the article in databases but I just realized it would be easier for me to retrieve with links to a google scholar search.
I would prefer the title and author or year in the link. I usually just copy paste the name into my library search engine and try to find that.
A link to a Google Scholar search with the article at the top would be the easiest for me.
(A general note: searching with the 'allintitle:' operator and the article title often suffices to uniquely identify the article. An example.)
The effects of framing, problem variations, and providing rationale on choice
Here.
Perfect, thanks.
http://teamat.oxfordjournals.org/content/6/4/179.extract
Here, courtesy of my friend.
?
sorry, bad formatting, it's updated.
Ah. Thanks.
I don't have access to this and I cannot do an ILL request because I usually use my gf's account and it would currently be disrespectful to use her account (not due to anything related to this).
Thanks so much!
The Effect Of Training Working Memory And Attention On Pupils’ Fluid Intelligence, C J Zhong 2012, Master's thesis.
Can't seem to find the author anywhere to contact, and there's no obvious way to get it via UWash; supposedly you can order it from that site but I'm not sure I care $25 worth. (The abstract indicates that it used no-contact control groups, so the observation of increased IQ isn't that interesting: it's what the current literature predicts.)
Can be viewed at: http://www.doc88.com/p-397166703921.html
(It's in Chinese.)
Oh, thanks. I guess now it's time to start guessing what each table is...
How did you find that? Is my Google-fu weak or did you just know that Chinese theses could usually be found on
doc88.com, whatever that is?Nothing wrong with your Google-fu – I just searched for the article title in Chinese (found the Chinese title through the third English result; my rudimentary understanding of Chinese helped a little since the position of the title is not obvious on that page).
I just had a brief look at the tables and tried to translate them, but it turns out that my Chinese sucks too much... My lack of familiarity with n-back studies doesn't help. I can probably help translate very short phrases, but I'm not really able to understand the context.
I have partial translations of a number of points: http://groups.google.com/d/msg/brain-training/V_msD2vUjy4/3JN9Vj636K0J
What I could really use now is info on the division of the kids into the various experimental & control groups - I'd prefer not to assume the division was just equal...
Request for comments from others who frequent this page:
I have been feeling that the academic literature is severely underused outside academia, including here on LW. Every now and then, I see a discussion that I think of interrupting to say, "Why don't you guys go on Google Scholar to learn more about this from people who have already thought about this? [As opposed to trying to come up with the same ideas by yourselves.]" (Access isn't a problem: abstracts often provide the information that one is looking for, and besides, free access to the vast majority of cited articles is available within hours from, e.g., here and Reddit's r/scholar.)
I'm hesitant about making this sort of comment because there is a clear potential for signaling: "I read journal articles that smart people read; I'm so smart. [You don't read these articles; you're not smart.]" From an outside view, I can imagine people making this sort of comment to signal intelligence (related), so I'm worried that my belief that the academic literature is underused is coming from a rationalization of a desire to use this signal.
If the literature is indeed underused, one possible explanation is that online journal access and search is a very recent innovation. If I'm not mistaken, it was very difficult for the general public to access any journal article ten years ago (and searching for specific information would have been a daunting task even for specialists).
Any thoughts?
Beware trivial inconveniences!
I do agree with your main point, though. I've had experiences like gwern's of being able to dredge up information to check guesses (or comments that just trigger my BS detector generally) in 5 minutes with Google, Wikipedia, or even my PDF folder.
A former coworker of mine used to say in such circumstances: " Shall we make it up or look it up?"
'Discussion is not about Information'? If I saw people using Google routinely, I would wonder if maybe there's some sort of recentness issue; but I see even sophisticated young techies who literally grew up using Google failing to do so. I can't count how many times on LessWrong, Reddit, Wikipedia, or IRC I have spent 5 seconds in Google and refuted or confirmed someone's speculation. There's a reason LMGIFY is an acronym.
This is certainly true, I often do this myself and notice I could Google something and still don't do it. It's usually when I'm hanging out with friends and we're speculating about something because it's fun to speculate rather than because we want to figure something out.
Huh, this was actually the first explanation that came to mind. I wanted to check if I was being too cynical (or too caught up in my own signaling), so I avoided mentioning it.
Some more older stuff I am looking for. Any help finding them would be greatly appreciated.
If you're still looking for "Latest Methods for the Conception and Education of Intelligent Machines", my university library has the issue of the journal this appeared in (Behavioral Science 4: 248-51; July 1959). Let me know if you want a copy.
Thank you very much for the offer. I am not looking for this text anymore.
Edited: Added #2 to list. Edited again: Added #9 to list.
Sorry, very little luck.
I knew it would happen: Remembered probabilities of once-future things