Disclaimer: (Those who know how crazy I can be or are crazy enough, skip this part)
For diplomatic & precautionary reasons, the following obvious facts about this post :
- Purely imaginary stuff NOT to be taken seriously.
- This “paper” does not reflect how we do research. We are quite serious folks when it comes to research!
- This “paper” does not reflect how I write papers. I generally write up stuff I believe in and actually know quite a bit about what I am proposing/claiming/referring to.
- This opinion is entirely mine and not supported or even considered as an opinion by the institute I belong to. (Just in case some weirdo actually thinks institutes can have such crazy opinions! 😛 )
- This post is not to be immaturely interpreted to mean that I am outrageously jobless!
Okay, that’s enough of sensible(?) stuff. On to a sample of the “revolutionary” writing style I propose for the research community to adopt to make papers more interesting less monotonous..
Qutb Architecture for QBA
Me & My Advisors*
Cool Institute, Hot City
* – it is for a blind review process. .Guess who we are. .Tee Hee 😀
Abstract We all know about this super-hot technology called QBA and the world is waiting to dive in and reap its benefits ASAP. In this paper, we propose an amazing architecture for QBA which would revolutionize the way we live life. It is so good.. We can’t describe it in the abstract. So, do read on!
So, this QBA technology is one amazing thing that has come up in recent years. It is a promising concept and has the potential to really good things to the VLSI industry. If you haven’t heard of it already (most probably you haven’t), go read up what its creators have to say in these papers . I can’t be writing up all the basic stuff here with the miserly conference guys giving me only 2 pages to say my stuff.
For those who read only the Abstract, Introduction and Conclusion sections and expect to appreciate the research in the paper, all we have to say is this. We were very much disappointed by all existing works which propose architectures for QBA and decided to throw in our bit to the literature out there. So, what we propose here is a novel, mint-fresh architecture which is efficient, compact, low power, low cost, like nothing before in history. We call it the Qutb Architecture because – a) architecture, Qutb – see the link? b) the Qutb happens to be the first author’s favorite structure around here c) Qutb & QBA alliterate 😉 . Now that you have your reason to go ahead and read the rest of the paper, you better read up the rest of the prose.
II. QBA Architectures in Literature
We do realize that a lot of people have tried to come up with architectures for QBA. But, unfortunately, sadly, disappointingly, we do not really like any of them. What X et al. propose is too simple. Y’s idea is nothing new.. it’s just old beer in new, shiny can. The stuff P & Q are taking about appears good but has its own problems. As far as the architecture A, B & C propose, its too complicated. Frankly, I can not understand what they are doing in that basic block. Other ideas that have been talked of are too lame for our tastes.
Well. . I was supposed to write up a survey paper thingy & was reading up all those papers mentioned in Section II. The bulb glowed at that point to do something new which will overcome all those problems. Gives the world an all-goody-goody (like maryadha purushottam Ram) architecture for QBA and gives me an excuse not to write up the survey paper for the moment. Smart na? B-)
IV. Our Qutb Architecture
So, the thing we propose is this. To escape the problem of blah#1, we exploit the unique blah#2 property of the QBA fabric. Next, we do this & add that, keeping it like this so that problem blah#3 does not surface. With those handled, feature blah#4 is incorporated so as to make the architecture very efficient wrt. both area and timing. Figure 1 illustrates the design of this stuff. Note that the whole thing is so simple, it is actually cute.
So that is broadly how our thing works. I can not really explain it better here (only 2 pages remember? 😦 ). If you are really interested in understanding it (that’d be so wow!), feel free to drop an e-mail to me. . We can discuss the beauty of this concept over coffee or on skype 🙂 .
As mentioned earlier, our architecture is amazing, the others’ are not. Simple. Ours performs better in whatever experiments we conducted (well, in most of them). And we sincerely, passionately, feverishly believe & hope that our architecture is better in may other ways that the experiments do not prove too. Please trust our intuition on this. Anyway it is so cute, there is really no reason you would go for those ugly architectures above overs.
Being as humble as we are, we would like to point out the small issues in our beloved Qutb architecture too. It is not as cute as we would like it to be. But don’t worry, we are working on it!
(Reader is requested to read Abstract, 2nd paragraph of Introduction and 1st paragraph of Analysis sections again)
Further work is however required to statistically prove that this Qutb architecture for QBA is better in ways blah#5, blah#6, blah#7 and blah#8 than existing architectures. I do not have the patience to do all that at the moment. In any case, if I were to work on getting all those data, I would be ready to present my PhD thesis any moment. .which I am not. So, hold on till I do or try to do it yourself. Cya.
No space left for references. You do not need it anyway. . 1) You are not going to actually look up the references. 2) You have Google! 😐 3) I am not citing any of my or my advisors’ papers anyway.
.. as to how this undeniably boring, even frustrating, BP-raising task can become amusing!
I am talking about every TA’s nightmare : Exam paper Evaluation!
But such answers really flatten my boredom/frustration curve..
“The answer probably 🙂 is 32.”
That after 1.5 pages of deriving the “answer”! And the smiley was there too!!
A similar one .. without the probability brought in though. .
“The latency is 21.
Or it could be 23.”
A page full of some answer scratched/scribbled/doodled on with perfected hatred..
Some seemingly legible writing striked out ever so lightly… Followed by this..
“The correct answer is the first, striked out one. Sorry”
Though not an answer, a very sweet note
“Sorry for the sorry state of the paper 🙂 “
Most curious one..
On a blank page. .
“Look next page please”
Another blank page..
“Look next page please”
“Look next page please”
If the intention was to provide some entertainment to the evaluator.. Thank you! 😉