The code proponents have made repeated use of the fact that one piece of their work has appeared in a peer reviewed journal, namely Statistical Science. While the referring process is normally totally confidential, the referee during part of the process has made some statements about the process and I've both received his permission to pass them on and I've confirmed them with the editor of Statitical Science at the time. It is an important part of understanding the significance of the appearance of this paper to know what was actually recommended.

First, you need to know that the paper was initially submitted to Proceedings of the (U.S.) National Academy of Sciences (PNAS). The referees during that part of the process included Persi Diaconis, at the time at Stanford and more recently at Harvard and Cornell. Many, including me, regard him as the world's leading mathematical statistician. He and the other referees decided the paper was not suitable for PNAS and it was rejected.

Diaconis recommended that the paper instead be considered for Statistical Science. This journal is not a typical scientific journal with nothing other than dry, formal mathematical presentations. It is a lively journal that includes historical reminisces and discussions.

Diaconis (who advised the editor but wasn't a formal referee on this iteration of the process) did not recommend that the paper appear as a stand alone piece because he regarded the paper as "a curious but not solid result." Rather, he proposed that the paper appear as a discussion piece together with various rebuttals and replies to the rebuttals.

Rob Kass, the editor of the journal at the time, decided to publish it without discussion although initially he agreed to weave some negative comments from Diaconis into his editorial on the piece. In the end, Kass decided against even doing that.  Kass has posted further remarks on the significance of the acceptance of the paper.

Kass is quoted in the New York Times as saying about papers that Statistical Science accepts: "We hope that the material in them is correct but we also try to publish pieces that are amusing to a wide variety of statisticians."

Aish HaTorah's website (http://www.discoveryseminar.org/bogus.htm) says of the acceptance of this paper: "Professional scientific and mathematical journals consult with a cadre of world class experts for the purpose of insuring that an article containing a mathematical or scientific flaw is not published in their journal." You decide whether you think that applies in this case given this information about the process.

Note: This is additional commentary provided by Barry Simon and is not part of the Jewish Action article.

Back to Main Page