We’re rewarding the question askers & reputations are being recalculated! Read more.

 5 replaced http://scicomp.stackexchange.com/ with https://scicomp.stackexchange.com/ edited Apr 13 '17 at 12:53 http://scicomp.stackexchange.com/questions/1040/which-linear-algebra-texts-should-i-read-before-learning-numerical-linear-algebrWhich linear algebra texts should I read before learning numerical linear algebra?: Keep. There's a small number of defensible answers here by experts. Could it be posed better so that it looks less like a list question? Yeah, probably. I'm not a fan of the answer that data dumped a list without any explanation. The key criteria I'd use here is: there are definitely wrong answers here, in that there are a small number of highly recommended linear algebra books, and to recommend anything other than those books would require a lot of evidence to back up said recommendation. http://scicomp.stackexchange.com/questions/1014/what-are-some-applications-which-require-interval-arithmeticWhat are some applications which require interval arithmetic?: Keep. Again, there are wrong answers, and it's not as if anyone can just chime in (as opposed to the dense matrix question further down the page). Interval analysis is a pretty specialized topic within computational science. http://scicomp.stackexchange.com/questions/943/what-kinds-of-problems-lend-themselves-well-to-gpu-computingWhat kinds of problems lend themselves well to GPU computing?: Keep. Not anyone in computational science can just chime in here. Only people who actually know stuff about GPUs could answer this question in a way that makes sense. http://scicomp.stackexchange.com/questions/938/databases-of-results-for-numerical-codesDatabases of results for numerical codes: Borderline. I'd keep it, but maybe reorganize the answers into a community wiki resource. There are definitely wrong answers to this question, but the barrier to entry is high (i.e., come up with a data set not mentioned, and have it be a bad data set with standard results). http://scicomp.stackexchange.com/questions/351/recommendations-for-a-usable-fast-c-matrix-libraryRecommendations for a usable, fast C++ matrix library?: Borderline. I wrote this question, and originally, I set very specific guidelines on what I wanted, and then I wrote a long answer figuring that hey, people might want a summary of what I found out after doing research for a day. A lot of people like it, and it generated me a lot of rep (thank you for all who voted). I thought there weren't that many C++ matrix libraries out there in popular use, but the answer has started to attract some good links and some bad links. We could wikify it, but I'd rather take myself out of that decision and leave it to other people because I'm biased about my own question. The problem I could see with closing this question on the grounds that it's a software question is going to be that there are so many software-type questions out there, and they make up a substantial fraction of the site. I think the more defensible reason would be, "Anyone can wrap a 1-D array in a class to simulate a matrix, post it on their web site, and call it a 'Matrix Library'." So, in other words, it could be that this software request is too basic and that there are virtually no wrong answers, in which case, I should've asked a better question, and can try to edit it to save the question by eliminating upstarts and focusing on codes that have an institution behind them; this qualification should, in theory, make it easier for there to be wrong answers. http://scicomp.stackexchange.com/questions/1300/algebraic-multigrid-codeAlgebraic Multigrid Code: Keep. Another software-type question. I didn't think there are that many AMG codes out there, but perhaps I'm wrong? http://scicomp.stackexchange.com/questions/1179/are-open-source-codes-available-to-study-protein-foldingAre open-source codes available to study protein folding?: Keep. Are there that many protein-folding codes? (Seriously, it's not my field, so I'm curious if there are.) http://scicomp.stackexchange.com/questions/1292/adding-deliberate-imperfection-to-rng-output-toolkitsAdding deliberate imperfection to RNG output - toolkits?: Keep. I don't even know of any software that does anything like adding deliberate imperfections to RNG output toolkits, which makes me think that there are indeed wrong answers. http://scicomp.stackexchange.com/questions/376/mathematical-libraries-for-openclMathematical Libraries for OpenCL?: Edit. We should edit this one. Everything but the first sentence of this question is pretty specific in its scope; those sentences are limited to ViennaCL, cusp, and OCLTools. The problem is in the first sentence, "I am looking for information from anyone that has tried to use OpenCL in their scientific code." It's too easy for someone to post about casual experience with OpenCL, and I don't think that's the intent of the question. http://scicomp.stackexchange.com/questions/1278/sparse-hermitian-eigensystems-are-there-better-techniques-than-arpack-or-trlanSparse hermitian eigensystems: are there better techniques than Arpack or TRLan?: Keep. Either there are packages that are competitive or better than ARPACK and TRLan for the poster's problems, or there aren't. http://scicomp.stackexchange.com/questions/252/where-can-i-find-a-database-of-simple-chemical-structures-in-xyz-formatWhere can I find a database of simple chemical structures in XYZ format?: Borderline. I could see this question going either way. Either there aren't that many databases for chemical structures, or the barrier to entry of this question is too low, and anyone can say something about structure conversion. I'm tempted to say that we should keep this one, on the grounds that I doubt there's are a lot of databases. http://scicomp.stackexchange.com/questions/975/texture-analysis-methods-modern-survey-paperTexture analysis methods modern survey paper: Keep. No one's even answered this question, so I'm not too worried about it anyone being able to contribute a correct answer. http://scicomp.stackexchange.com/questions/83/is-there-a-high-quality-nonlinear-programming-solver-for-pythonIs there a high quality nonlinear programming solver for Python?: Keep. Yes, the question is subjective, but there are really only so many high quality nonlinear programming solvers out there (maybe 10?), and the rest are just implementations of some sequential quadratic programming method or active set method or interior point method, etc. A lot of people have implemented nonlinear programming methods, but implementing a method doesn't make it high quality, and the people who stepped forward with research quality libraries were pretty up front about it. http://scicomp.stackexchange.com/questions/1202/are-there-any-open-source-inverse-based-multilevel-ilu-implementationsAre there any open source inverse-based multilevel ILU implementations?: Keep. Sadly, the answer to this question seems to be no, because no one's said anything. I'm not expecting a flood of answers here. http://scicomp.stackexchange.com/questions/1088/is-there-any-open-source-or-easy-to-access-software-that-can-simplify-algebraicIs there any open-source or easy-to-access software that can simplify algebraic expressions like $x^{2}+2x+3, x=\sqrt{2}t-1$?: Keep. There are a handful of commonly used open source CAS software packages, so I don't think it'd be terrible to list all of them. http://scicomp.stackexchange.com/questions/1129/what-guidelines-should-i-use-when-searching-for-good-preconditioning-methods-forWhat guidelines should I use when searching for good preconditioning methods for a specific problem?: Keep. Looks like a question that isn't easy to answer. I thought JackPoulson did a good job here. I don't think it's a list question, because there are wrong answers. http://scicomp.stackexchange.com/questions/1120/is-there-a-good-site-for-holding-online-discussions-of-scientific-papershttps://scicomp.stackexchange.com/questions/1120/is-there-a-good-site-for-holding-online-discussions-of-scientific-papers: Keep for now. Somewhat surprisingly, this post hasn't gotten an answer. I think there won't be many answers until a bunch of sites like HiveMined, and so on, come online, and then there might be a lot of them. We might want to edit this question, but this question isn't in imminent danger of being swamped with answers. http://scicomp.stackexchange.com/questions/1108/where-do-dense-matrices-occurWhere do dense matrices occur?: Close. I think the potential for abuse of this question is too great, because I don't think the number of applications in which dense matrices occur is small, therefore it's too easy for this question to become a list of applications because the pool of answers is too large. http://scicomp.stackexchange.com/questions/923/what-simple-methods-are-there-for-adaptively-sampling-a-2d-functionWhat simple methods are there for adaptively sampling a 2D function?: Keep. I feel like this question is limited in scope. I don't think it would be easy for anyone in the scientific community to come in and post an answer to that question. http://scicomp.stackexchange.com/questions/660/venues-for-publishing-papers-that-emphasize-softwareVenues for publishing papers that emphasize software: Keep for now. Ah, this question. I like this question, but I'd badger some people about making their answers better. One of the problems I have with journal questions is that the potential for abuse is too great, which is why I wanted to close it. There are a lot of journals out there, and any exhaustive list would be long, which makes me think it's easy fodder for newcomers to the site. Part of me is a little concerned that the vote system could in some way be construed as a popularity indicator of journals. All of these reasons are treading over old ground, though. http://scicomp.stackexchange.com/questions/1040/which-linear-algebra-texts-should-i-read-before-learning-numerical-linear-algebr: Keep. There's a small number of defensible answers here by experts. Could it be posed better so that it looks less like a list question? Yeah, probably. I'm not a fan of the answer that data dumped a list without any explanation. The key criteria I'd use here is: there are definitely wrong answers here, in that there are a small number of highly recommended linear algebra books, and to recommend anything other than those books would require a lot of evidence to back up said recommendation. http://scicomp.stackexchange.com/questions/1014/what-are-some-applications-which-require-interval-arithmetic: Keep. Again, there are wrong answers, and it's not as if anyone can just chime in (as opposed to the dense matrix question further down the page). Interval analysis is a pretty specialized topic within computational science. http://scicomp.stackexchange.com/questions/943/what-kinds-of-problems-lend-themselves-well-to-gpu-computing: Keep. Not anyone in computational science can just chime in here. Only people who actually know stuff about GPUs could answer this question in a way that makes sense. http://scicomp.stackexchange.com/questions/938/databases-of-results-for-numerical-codes: Borderline. I'd keep it, but maybe reorganize the answers into a community wiki resource. There are definitely wrong answers to this question, but the barrier to entry is high (i.e., come up with a data set not mentioned, and have it be a bad data set with standard results). http://scicomp.stackexchange.com/questions/351/recommendations-for-a-usable-fast-c-matrix-library: Borderline. I wrote this question, and originally, I set very specific guidelines on what I wanted, and then I wrote a long answer figuring that hey, people might want a summary of what I found out after doing research for a day. A lot of people like it, and it generated me a lot of rep (thank you for all who voted). I thought there weren't that many C++ matrix libraries out there in popular use, but the answer has started to attract some good links and some bad links. We could wikify it, but I'd rather take myself out of that decision and leave it to other people because I'm biased about my own question. The problem I could see with closing this question on the grounds that it's a software question is going to be that there are so many software-type questions out there, and they make up a substantial fraction of the site. I think the more defensible reason would be, "Anyone can wrap a 1-D array in a class to simulate a matrix, post it on their web site, and call it a 'Matrix Library'." So, in other words, it could be that this software request is too basic and that there are virtually no wrong answers, in which case, I should've asked a better question, and can try to edit it to save the question by eliminating upstarts and focusing on codes that have an institution behind them; this qualification should, in theory, make it easier for there to be wrong answers. http://scicomp.stackexchange.com/questions/1300/algebraic-multigrid-code: Keep. Another software-type question. I didn't think there are that many AMG codes out there, but perhaps I'm wrong? http://scicomp.stackexchange.com/questions/1179/are-open-source-codes-available-to-study-protein-folding: Keep. Are there that many protein-folding codes? (Seriously, it's not my field, so I'm curious if there are.) http://scicomp.stackexchange.com/questions/1292/adding-deliberate-imperfection-to-rng-output-toolkits: Keep. I don't even know of any software that does anything like adding deliberate imperfections to RNG output toolkits, which makes me think that there are indeed wrong answers. http://scicomp.stackexchange.com/questions/376/mathematical-libraries-for-opencl: Edit. We should edit this one. Everything but the first sentence of this question is pretty specific in its scope; those sentences are limited to ViennaCL, cusp, and OCLTools. The problem is in the first sentence, "I am looking for information from anyone that has tried to use OpenCL in their scientific code." It's too easy for someone to post about casual experience with OpenCL, and I don't think that's the intent of the question. http://scicomp.stackexchange.com/questions/1278/sparse-hermitian-eigensystems-are-there-better-techniques-than-arpack-or-trlan: Keep. Either there are packages that are competitive or better than ARPACK and TRLan for the poster's problems, or there aren't. http://scicomp.stackexchange.com/questions/252/where-can-i-find-a-database-of-simple-chemical-structures-in-xyz-format: Borderline. I could see this question going either way. Either there aren't that many databases for chemical structures, or the barrier to entry of this question is too low, and anyone can say something about structure conversion. I'm tempted to say that we should keep this one, on the grounds that I doubt there's are a lot of databases. http://scicomp.stackexchange.com/questions/975/texture-analysis-methods-modern-survey-paper: Keep. No one's even answered this question, so I'm not too worried about it anyone being able to contribute a correct answer. http://scicomp.stackexchange.com/questions/83/is-there-a-high-quality-nonlinear-programming-solver-for-python: Keep. Yes, the question is subjective, but there are really only so many high quality nonlinear programming solvers out there (maybe 10?), and the rest are just implementations of some sequential quadratic programming method or active set method or interior point method, etc. A lot of people have implemented nonlinear programming methods, but implementing a method doesn't make it high quality, and the people who stepped forward with research quality libraries were pretty up front about it. http://scicomp.stackexchange.com/questions/1202/are-there-any-open-source-inverse-based-multilevel-ilu-implementations: Keep. Sadly, the answer to this question seems to be no, because no one's said anything. I'm not expecting a flood of answers here. http://scicomp.stackexchange.com/questions/1088/is-there-any-open-source-or-easy-to-access-software-that-can-simplify-algebraic: Keep. There are a handful of commonly used open source CAS software packages, so I don't think it'd be terrible to list all of them. http://scicomp.stackexchange.com/questions/1129/what-guidelines-should-i-use-when-searching-for-good-preconditioning-methods-for: Keep. Looks like a question that isn't easy to answer. I thought JackPoulson did a good job here. I don't think it's a list question, because there are wrong answers. http://scicomp.stackexchange.com/questions/1120/is-there-a-good-site-for-holding-online-discussions-of-scientific-papers: Keep for now. Somewhat surprisingly, this post hasn't gotten an answer. I think there won't be many answers until a bunch of sites like HiveMined, and so on, come online, and then there might be a lot of them. We might want to edit this question, but this question isn't in imminent danger of being swamped with answers. http://scicomp.stackexchange.com/questions/1108/where-do-dense-matrices-occur: Close. I think the potential for abuse of this question is too great, because I don't think the number of applications in which dense matrices occur is small, therefore it's too easy for this question to become a list of applications because the pool of answers is too large. http://scicomp.stackexchange.com/questions/923/what-simple-methods-are-there-for-adaptively-sampling-a-2d-function: Keep. I feel like this question is limited in scope. I don't think it would be easy for anyone in the scientific community to come in and post an answer to that question. http://scicomp.stackexchange.com/questions/660/venues-for-publishing-papers-that-emphasize-software: Keep for now. Ah, this question. I like this question, but I'd badger some people about making their answers better. One of the problems I have with journal questions is that the potential for abuse is too great, which is why I wanted to close it. There are a lot of journals out there, and any exhaustive list would be long, which makes me think it's easy fodder for newcomers to the site. Part of me is a little concerned that the vote system could in some way be construed as a popularity indicator of journals. All of these reasons are treading over old ground, though. Which linear algebra texts should I read before learning numerical linear algebra?: Keep. There's a small number of defensible answers here by experts. Could it be posed better so that it looks less like a list question? Yeah, probably. I'm not a fan of the answer that data dumped a list without any explanation. The key criteria I'd use here is: there are definitely wrong answers here, in that there are a small number of highly recommended linear algebra books, and to recommend anything other than those books would require a lot of evidence to back up said recommendation. What are some applications which require interval arithmetic?: Keep. Again, there are wrong answers, and it's not as if anyone can just chime in (as opposed to the dense matrix question further down the page). Interval analysis is a pretty specialized topic within computational science. What kinds of problems lend themselves well to GPU computing?: Keep. Not anyone in computational science can just chime in here. Only people who actually know stuff about GPUs could answer this question in a way that makes sense. Databases of results for numerical codes: Borderline. I'd keep it, but maybe reorganize the answers into a community wiki resource. There are definitely wrong answers to this question, but the barrier to entry is high (i.e., come up with a data set not mentioned, and have it be a bad data set with standard results). Recommendations for a usable, fast C++ matrix library?: Borderline. I wrote this question, and originally, I set very specific guidelines on what I wanted, and then I wrote a long answer figuring that hey, people might want a summary of what I found out after doing research for a day. A lot of people like it, and it generated me a lot of rep (thank you for all who voted). I thought there weren't that many C++ matrix libraries out there in popular use, but the answer has started to attract some good links and some bad links. We could wikify it, but I'd rather take myself out of that decision and leave it to other people because I'm biased about my own question. The problem I could see with closing this question on the grounds that it's a software question is going to be that there are so many software-type questions out there, and they make up a substantial fraction of the site. I think the more defensible reason would be, "Anyone can wrap a 1-D array in a class to simulate a matrix, post it on their web site, and call it a 'Matrix Library'." So, in other words, it could be that this software request is too basic and that there are virtually no wrong answers, in which case, I should've asked a better question, and can try to edit it to save the question by eliminating upstarts and focusing on codes that have an institution behind them; this qualification should, in theory, make it easier for there to be wrong answers. Algebraic Multigrid Code: Keep. Another software-type question. I didn't think there are that many AMG codes out there, but perhaps I'm wrong? Are open-source codes available to study protein folding?: Keep. Are there that many protein-folding codes? (Seriously, it's not my field, so I'm curious if there are.) Adding deliberate imperfection to RNG output - toolkits?: Keep. I don't even know of any software that does anything like adding deliberate imperfections to RNG output toolkits, which makes me think that there are indeed wrong answers. Mathematical Libraries for OpenCL?: Edit. We should edit this one. Everything but the first sentence of this question is pretty specific in its scope; those sentences are limited to ViennaCL, cusp, and OCLTools. The problem is in the first sentence, "I am looking for information from anyone that has tried to use OpenCL in their scientific code." It's too easy for someone to post about casual experience with OpenCL, and I don't think that's the intent of the question. Sparse hermitian eigensystems: are there better techniques than Arpack or TRLan?: Keep. Either there are packages that are competitive or better than ARPACK and TRLan for the poster's problems, or there aren't. Where can I find a database of simple chemical structures in XYZ format?: Borderline. I could see this question going either way. Either there aren't that many databases for chemical structures, or the barrier to entry of this question is too low, and anyone can say something about structure conversion. I'm tempted to say that we should keep this one, on the grounds that I doubt there's are a lot of databases. Texture analysis methods modern survey paper: Keep. No one's even answered this question, so I'm not too worried about it anyone being able to contribute a correct answer. Is there a high quality nonlinear programming solver for Python?: Keep. Yes, the question is subjective, but there are really only so many high quality nonlinear programming solvers out there (maybe 10?), and the rest are just implementations of some sequential quadratic programming method or active set method or interior point method, etc. A lot of people have implemented nonlinear programming methods, but implementing a method doesn't make it high quality, and the people who stepped forward with research quality libraries were pretty up front about it. Are there any open source inverse-based multilevel ILU implementations?: Keep. Sadly, the answer to this question seems to be no, because no one's said anything. I'm not expecting a flood of answers here. Is there any open-source or easy-to-access software that can simplify algebraic expressions like $x^{2}+2x+3, x=\sqrt{2}t-1$?: Keep. There are a handful of commonly used open source CAS software packages, so I don't think it'd be terrible to list all of them. What guidelines should I use when searching for good preconditioning methods for a specific problem?: Keep. Looks like a question that isn't easy to answer. I thought JackPoulson did a good job here. I don't think it's a list question, because there are wrong answers. https://scicomp.stackexchange.com/questions/1120/is-there-a-good-site-for-holding-online-discussions-of-scientific-papers: Keep for now. Somewhat surprisingly, this post hasn't gotten an answer. I think there won't be many answers until a bunch of sites like HiveMined, and so on, come online, and then there might be a lot of them. We might want to edit this question, but this question isn't in imminent danger of being swamped with answers. Where do dense matrices occur?: Close. I think the potential for abuse of this question is too great, because I don't think the number of applications in which dense matrices occur is small, therefore it's too easy for this question to become a list of applications because the pool of answers is too large. What simple methods are there for adaptively sampling a 2D function?: Keep. I feel like this question is limited in scope. I don't think it would be easy for anyone in the scientific community to come in and post an answer to that question. Venues for publishing papers that emphasize software: Keep for now. Ah, this question. I like this question, but I'd badger some people about making their answers better. One of the problems I have with journal questions is that the potential for abuse is too great, which is why I wanted to close it. There are a lot of journals out there, and any exhaustive list would be long, which makes me think it's easy fodder for newcomers to the site. Part of me is a little concerned that the vote system could in some way be construed as a popularity indicator of journals. All of these reasons are treading over old ground, though. 4 replaced http://meta.stackexchange.com/ with https://meta.stackexchange.com/ edited Mar 20 '17 at 10:29 A good example of the life cycle of a list-type questions is Kev's answer in "Exceptional cases for list questions""Exceptional cases for list questions" on Meta Stack Overflow: Now, in the spirit of The Great Question Deletion Audit of 2012The Great Question Deletion Audit of 2012, let's go down the list: A good example of the life cycle of a list-type questions is Kev's answer in "Exceptional cases for list questions" on Meta Stack Overflow: Now, in the spirit of The Great Question Deletion Audit of 2012, let's go down the list: A good example of the life cycle of a list-type questions is Kev's answer in "Exceptional cases for list questions" on Meta Stack Overflow: Now, in the spirit of The Great Question Deletion Audit of 2012, let's go down the list: 3 Fixup of bad MSO links to MSE links migration edited Apr 23 '14 at 13:45 Which linear algebra texts should I read before learning numerical linear algebra?http://scicomp.stackexchange.com/questions/1040/which-linear-algebra-texts-should-i-read-before-learning-numerical-linear-algebr: Keep. There's a small number of defensible answers here by experts. Could it be posed better so that it looks less like a list question? Yeah, probably. I'm not a fan of the answer that data dumped a list without any explanation. The key criteria I'd use here is: there are definitely wrong answers here, in that there are a small number of highly recommended linear algebra books, and to recommend anything other than those books would require a lot of evidence to back up said recommendation. What are some applications which require interval arithmetic?http://scicomp.stackexchange.com/questions/1014/what-are-some-applications-which-require-interval-arithmetic: Keep. Again, there are wrong answers, and it's not as if anyone can just chime in (as opposed to the dense matrix question further down the page). Interval analysis is a pretty specialized topic within computational science. What kinds of problems lend themselves well to GPU computing?http://scicomp.stackexchange.com/questions/943/what-kinds-of-problems-lend-themselves-well-to-gpu-computing: Keep. Not anyone in computational science can just chime in here. Only people who actually know stuff about GPUs could answer this question in a way that makes sense. Databases of results for numerical codeshttp://scicomp.stackexchange.com/questions/938/databases-of-results-for-numerical-codes: Borderline. I'd keep it, but maybe reorganize the answers into a community wiki resource. There are definitely wrong answers to this question, but the barrier to entry is high (i.e., come up with a data set not mentioned, and have it be a bad data set with standard results). Recommendations for a usable, fast C++ matrix library?http://scicomp.stackexchange.com/questions/351/recommendations-for-a-usable-fast-c-matrix-library: Borderline. I wrote this question, and originally, I set very specific guidelines on what I wanted, and then I wrote a long answer figuring that hey, people might want a summary of what I found out after doing research for a day. A lot of people like it, and it generated me a lot of rep (thank you for all who voted). I thought there weren't that many C++ matrix libraries out there in popular use, but the answer has started to attract some good links and some bad links. We could wikify it, but I'd rather take myself out of that decision and leave it to other people because I'm biased about my own question. The problem I could see with closing this question on the grounds that it's a software question is going to be that there are so many software-type questions out there, and they make up a substantial fraction of the site. I think the more defensible reason would be, "Anyone can wrap a 1-D array in a class to simulate a matrix, post it on their web site, and call it a 'Matrix Library'." So, in other words, it could be that this software request is too basic and that there are virtually no wrong answers, in which case, I should've asked a better question, and can try to edit it to save the question by eliminating upstarts and focusing on codes that have an institution behind them; this qualification should, in theory, make it easier for there to be wrong answers. Algebraic Multigrid Codehttp://scicomp.stackexchange.com/questions/1300/algebraic-multigrid-code: Keep. Another software-type question. I didn't think there are that many AMG codes out there, but perhaps I'm wrong? Are openhttp://scicomp.stackexchange.com/questions/1179/are-open-source codes available to study protein folding?-codes-available-to-study-protein-folding: Keep. Are there that many protein-folding codes? (Seriously, it's not my field, so I'm curious if there are.) Adding deliberate imperfection to RNG output http://scicomp.stackexchange.com/questions/1292/adding- toolkits?deliberate-imperfection-to-rng-output-toolkits: Keep. I don't even know of any software that does anything like adding deliberate imperfections to RNG output toolkits, which makes me think that there are indeed wrong answers. Mathematical Libraries for OpenCL?http://scicomp.stackexchange.com/questions/376/mathematical-libraries-for-opencl: Edit. We should edit this one. Everything but the first sentence of this question is pretty specific in its scope; those sentences are limited to ViennaCL, cusp, and OCLTools. The problem is in the first sentence, "I am looking for information from anyone that has tried to use OpenCL in their scientific code." It's too easy for someone to post about casual experience with OpenCL, and I don't think that's the intent of the question. Sparse hermitian eigensystemshttp: are there better techniques than Arpack or TRLan?//scicomp.stackexchange.com/questions/1278/sparse-hermitian-eigensystems-are-there-better-techniques-than-arpack-or-trlan: Keep. Either there are packages that are competitive or better than ARPACK and TRLan for the poster's problems, or there aren't. Where can I find a database of simple chemical structures in XYZ format?http://scicomp.stackexchange.com/questions/252/where-can-i-find-a-database-of-simple-chemical-structures-in-xyz-format: Borderline. I could see this question going either way. Either there aren't that many databases for chemical structures, or the barrier to entry of this question is too low, and anyone can say something about structure conversion. I'm tempted to say that we should keep this one, on the grounds that I doubt there's are a lot of databases. Texture analysis methods modern survey paperhttp://scicomp.stackexchange.com/questions/975/texture-analysis-methods-modern-survey-paper: Keep. No one's even answered this question, so I'm not too worried about it anyone being able to contribute a correct answer. Is there a high quality nonlinear programming solver for Python?http://scicomp.stackexchange.com/questions/83/is-there-a-high-quality-nonlinear-programming-solver-for-python: Keep. Yes, the question is subjective, but there are really only so many high quality nonlinear programming solvers out there (maybe 10?), and the rest are just implementations of some sequential quadratic programming method or active set method or interior point method, etc. A lot of people have implemented nonlinear programming methods, but implementing a method doesn't make it high quality, and the people who stepped forward with research quality libraries were pretty up front about it. Are there any open source inversehttp://scicomp.stackexchange.com/questions/1202/are-there-any-open-source-inverse-based multilevel ILU implementations?-multilevel-ilu-implementations: Keep. Sadly, the answer to this question seems to be no, because no one's said anything. I'm not expecting a flood of answers here. Is there any openhttp://scicomp.stackexchange.com/questions/1088/is-there-any-open-source or easy-or-easy-to-access software that can simplify algebraic expressions like $$x^{2}+2x+3, x=\sqrt{2}t-1$$?-software-that-can-simplify-algebraic: Keep. There are a handful of commonly used open source CAS software packages, so I don't think it'd be terrible to list all of them. What guidelines should I use when searching for good preconditioning methods for a specific problem?http://scicomp.stackexchange.com/questions/1129/what-guidelines-should-i-use-when-searching-for-good-preconditioning-methods-for: Keep. Looks like a question that isn't easy to answer. I thought JackPoulson did a good job here. I don't think it's a list question, because there are wrong answers. Is there a good site for holding online discussions of scientific papers?http://scicomp.stackexchange.com/questions/1120/is-there-a-good-site-for-holding-online-discussions-of-scientific-papers: Keep for now. Somewhat surprisingly, this post hasn't gotten an answer. I think there won't be many answers until a bunch of sites like HiveMined, and so on, come online, and then there might be a lot of them. We might want to edit this question, but this question isn't in imminent danger of being swamped with answers. Where do dense matrices occur?http://scicomp.stackexchange.com/questions/1108/where-do-dense-matrices-occur: Close. I think the potential for abuse of this question is too great, because I don't think the number of applications in which dense matrices occur is small, therefore it's too easy for this question to become a list of applications because the pool of answers is too large. What simple methods are there for adaptively sampling a 2D function?http://scicomp.stackexchange.com/questions/923/what-simple-methods-are-there-for-adaptively-sampling-a-2d-function: Keep. I feel like this question is limited in scope. I don't think it would be easy for anyone in the scientific community to come in and post an answer to that question. Venues for publishing papers that emphasize softwarehttp://scicomp.stackexchange.com/questions/660/venues-for-publishing-papers-that-emphasize-software: Keep for now. Ah, this question. I like this question, but I'd badger some people about making their answers better. One of the problems I have with journal questions is that the potential for abuse is too great, which is why I wanted to close it. There are a lot of journals out there, and any exhaustive list would be long, which makes me think it's easy fodder for newcomers to the site. Part of me is a little concerned that the vote system could in some way be construed as a popularity indicator of journals. All of these reasons are treading over old ground, though. Which linear algebra texts should I read before learning numerical linear algebra?: Keep. There's a small number of defensible answers here by experts. Could it be posed better so that it looks less like a list question? Yeah, probably. I'm not a fan of the answer that data dumped a list without any explanation. The key criteria I'd use here is: there are definitely wrong answers here, in that there are a small number of highly recommended linear algebra books, and to recommend anything other than those books would require a lot of evidence to back up said recommendation. What are some applications which require interval arithmetic?: Keep. Again, there are wrong answers, and it's not as if anyone can just chime in (as opposed to the dense matrix question further down the page). Interval analysis is a pretty specialized topic within computational science. What kinds of problems lend themselves well to GPU computing?: Keep. Not anyone in computational science can just chime in here. Only people who actually know stuff about GPUs could answer this question in a way that makes sense. Databases of results for numerical codes: Borderline. I'd keep it, but maybe reorganize the answers into a community wiki resource. There are definitely wrong answers to this question, but the barrier to entry is high (i.e., come up with a data set not mentioned, and have it be a bad data set with standard results). Recommendations for a usable, fast C++ matrix library?: Borderline. I wrote this question, and originally, I set very specific guidelines on what I wanted, and then I wrote a long answer figuring that hey, people might want a summary of what I found out after doing research for a day. A lot of people like it, and it generated me a lot of rep (thank you for all who voted). I thought there weren't that many C++ matrix libraries out there in popular use, but the answer has started to attract some good links and some bad links. We could wikify it, but I'd rather take myself out of that decision and leave it to other people because I'm biased about my own question. The problem I could see with closing this question on the grounds that it's a software question is going to be that there are so many software-type questions out there, and they make up a substantial fraction of the site. I think the more defensible reason would be, "Anyone can wrap a 1-D array in a class to simulate a matrix, post it on their web site, and call it a 'Matrix Library'." So, in other words, it could be that this software request is too basic and that there are virtually no wrong answers, in which case, I should've asked a better question, and can try to edit it to save the question by eliminating upstarts and focusing on codes that have an institution behind them; this qualification should, in theory, make it easier for there to be wrong answers. Algebraic Multigrid Code: Keep. Another software-type question. I didn't think there are that many AMG codes out there, but perhaps I'm wrong? Are open-source codes available to study protein folding?: Keep. Are there that many protein-folding codes? (Seriously, it's not my field, so I'm curious if there are.) Adding deliberate imperfection to RNG output - toolkits?: Keep. I don't even know of any software that does anything like adding deliberate imperfections to RNG output toolkits, which makes me think that there are indeed wrong answers. Mathematical Libraries for OpenCL?: Edit. We should edit this one. Everything but the first sentence of this question is pretty specific in its scope; those sentences are limited to ViennaCL, cusp, and OCLTools. The problem is in the first sentence, "I am looking for information from anyone that has tried to use OpenCL in their scientific code." It's too easy for someone to post about casual experience with OpenCL, and I don't think that's the intent of the question. Sparse hermitian eigensystems: are there better techniques than Arpack or TRLan?: Keep. Either there are packages that are competitive or better than ARPACK and TRLan for the poster's problems, or there aren't. Where can I find a database of simple chemical structures in XYZ format?: Borderline. I could see this question going either way. Either there aren't that many databases for chemical structures, or the barrier to entry of this question is too low, and anyone can say something about structure conversion. I'm tempted to say that we should keep this one, on the grounds that I doubt there's are a lot of databases. Texture analysis methods modern survey paper: Keep. No one's even answered this question, so I'm not too worried about it anyone being able to contribute a correct answer. Is there a high quality nonlinear programming solver for Python?: Keep. Yes, the question is subjective, but there are really only so many high quality nonlinear programming solvers out there (maybe 10?), and the rest are just implementations of some sequential quadratic programming method or active set method or interior point method, etc. A lot of people have implemented nonlinear programming methods, but implementing a method doesn't make it high quality, and the people who stepped forward with research quality libraries were pretty up front about it. Are there any open source inverse-based multilevel ILU implementations?: Keep. Sadly, the answer to this question seems to be no, because no one's said anything. I'm not expecting a flood of answers here. Is there any open-source or easy-to-access software that can simplify algebraic expressions like $$x^{2}+2x+3, x=\sqrt{2}t-1$$?: Keep. There are a handful of commonly used open source CAS software packages, so I don't think it'd be terrible to list all of them. What guidelines should I use when searching for good preconditioning methods for a specific problem?: Keep. Looks like a question that isn't easy to answer. I thought JackPoulson did a good job here. I don't think it's a list question, because there are wrong answers. Is there a good site for holding online discussions of scientific papers?: Keep for now. Somewhat surprisingly, this post hasn't gotten an answer. I think there won't be many answers until a bunch of sites like HiveMined, and so on, come online, and then there might be a lot of them. We might want to edit this question, but this question isn't in imminent danger of being swamped with answers. Where do dense matrices occur?: Close. I think the potential for abuse of this question is too great, because I don't think the number of applications in which dense matrices occur is small, therefore it's too easy for this question to become a list of applications because the pool of answers is too large. What simple methods are there for adaptively sampling a 2D function?: Keep. I feel like this question is limited in scope. I don't think it would be easy for anyone in the scientific community to come in and post an answer to that question. Venues for publishing papers that emphasize software: Keep for now. Ah, this question. I like this question, but I'd badger some people about making their answers better. One of the problems I have with journal questions is that the potential for abuse is too great, which is why I wanted to close it. There are a lot of journals out there, and any exhaustive list would be long, which makes me think it's easy fodder for newcomers to the site. Part of me is a little concerned that the vote system could in some way be construed as a popularity indicator of journals. All of these reasons are treading over old ground, though. http://scicomp.stackexchange.com/questions/1040/which-linear-algebra-texts-should-i-read-before-learning-numerical-linear-algebr: Keep. There's a small number of defensible answers here by experts. Could it be posed better so that it looks less like a list question? Yeah, probably. I'm not a fan of the answer that data dumped a list without any explanation. The key criteria I'd use here is: there are definitely wrong answers here, in that there are a small number of highly recommended linear algebra books, and to recommend anything other than those books would require a lot of evidence to back up said recommendation. http://scicomp.stackexchange.com/questions/1014/what-are-some-applications-which-require-interval-arithmetic: Keep. Again, there are wrong answers, and it's not as if anyone can just chime in (as opposed to the dense matrix question further down the page). Interval analysis is a pretty specialized topic within computational science. http://scicomp.stackexchange.com/questions/943/what-kinds-of-problems-lend-themselves-well-to-gpu-computing: Keep. Not anyone in computational science can just chime in here. Only people who actually know stuff about GPUs could answer this question in a way that makes sense. http://scicomp.stackexchange.com/questions/938/databases-of-results-for-numerical-codes: Borderline. I'd keep it, but maybe reorganize the answers into a community wiki resource. There are definitely wrong answers to this question, but the barrier to entry is high (i.e., come up with a data set not mentioned, and have it be a bad data set with standard results). http://scicomp.stackexchange.com/questions/351/recommendations-for-a-usable-fast-c-matrix-library: Borderline. I wrote this question, and originally, I set very specific guidelines on what I wanted, and then I wrote a long answer figuring that hey, people might want a summary of what I found out after doing research for a day. A lot of people like it, and it generated me a lot of rep (thank you for all who voted). I thought there weren't that many C++ matrix libraries out there in popular use, but the answer has started to attract some good links and some bad links. We could wikify it, but I'd rather take myself out of that decision and leave it to other people because I'm biased about my own question. The problem I could see with closing this question on the grounds that it's a software question is going to be that there are so many software-type questions out there, and they make up a substantial fraction of the site. I think the more defensible reason would be, "Anyone can wrap a 1-D array in a class to simulate a matrix, post it on their web site, and call it a 'Matrix Library'." So, in other words, it could be that this software request is too basic and that there are virtually no wrong answers, in which case, I should've asked a better question, and can try to edit it to save the question by eliminating upstarts and focusing on codes that have an institution behind them; this qualification should, in theory, make it easier for there to be wrong answers. http://scicomp.stackexchange.com/questions/1300/algebraic-multigrid-code: Keep. Another software-type question. I didn't think there are that many AMG codes out there, but perhaps I'm wrong? http://scicomp.stackexchange.com/questions/1179/are-open-source-codes-available-to-study-protein-folding: Keep. Are there that many protein-folding codes? (Seriously, it's not my field, so I'm curious if there are.) http://scicomp.stackexchange.com/questions/1292/adding-deliberate-imperfection-to-rng-output-toolkits: Keep. I don't even know of any software that does anything like adding deliberate imperfections to RNG output toolkits, which makes me think that there are indeed wrong answers. http://scicomp.stackexchange.com/questions/376/mathematical-libraries-for-opencl: Edit. We should edit this one. Everything but the first sentence of this question is pretty specific in its scope; those sentences are limited to ViennaCL, cusp, and OCLTools. The problem is in the first sentence, "I am looking for information from anyone that has tried to use OpenCL in their scientific code." It's too easy for someone to post about casual experience with OpenCL, and I don't think that's the intent of the question. http://scicomp.stackexchange.com/questions/1278/sparse-hermitian-eigensystems-are-there-better-techniques-than-arpack-or-trlan: Keep. Either there are packages that are competitive or better than ARPACK and TRLan for the poster's problems, or there aren't. http://scicomp.stackexchange.com/questions/252/where-can-i-find-a-database-of-simple-chemical-structures-in-xyz-format: Borderline. I could see this question going either way. Either there aren't that many databases for chemical structures, or the barrier to entry of this question is too low, and anyone can say something about structure conversion. I'm tempted to say that we should keep this one, on the grounds that I doubt there's are a lot of databases. http://scicomp.stackexchange.com/questions/975/texture-analysis-methods-modern-survey-paper: Keep. No one's even answered this question, so I'm not too worried about it anyone being able to contribute a correct answer. http://scicomp.stackexchange.com/questions/83/is-there-a-high-quality-nonlinear-programming-solver-for-python: Keep. Yes, the question is subjective, but there are really only so many high quality nonlinear programming solvers out there (maybe 10?), and the rest are just implementations of some sequential quadratic programming method or active set method or interior point method, etc. A lot of people have implemented nonlinear programming methods, but implementing a method doesn't make it high quality, and the people who stepped forward with research quality libraries were pretty up front about it. http://scicomp.stackexchange.com/questions/1202/are-there-any-open-source-inverse-based-multilevel-ilu-implementations: Keep. Sadly, the answer to this question seems to be no, because no one's said anything. I'm not expecting a flood of answers here. http://scicomp.stackexchange.com/questions/1088/is-there-any-open-source-or-easy-to-access-software-that-can-simplify-algebraic: Keep. There are a handful of commonly used open source CAS software packages, so I don't think it'd be terrible to list all of them. http://scicomp.stackexchange.com/questions/1129/what-guidelines-should-i-use-when-searching-for-good-preconditioning-methods-for: Keep. Looks like a question that isn't easy to answer. I thought JackPoulson did a good job here. I don't think it's a list question, because there are wrong answers. http://scicomp.stackexchange.com/questions/1120/is-there-a-good-site-for-holding-online-discussions-of-scientific-papers: Keep for now. Somewhat surprisingly, this post hasn't gotten an answer. I think there won't be many answers until a bunch of sites like HiveMined, and so on, come online, and then there might be a lot of them. We might want to edit this question, but this question isn't in imminent danger of being swamped with answers. http://scicomp.stackexchange.com/questions/1108/where-do-dense-matrices-occur: Close. I think the potential for abuse of this question is too great, because I don't think the number of applications in which dense matrices occur is small, therefore it's too easy for this question to become a list of applications because the pool of answers is too large. http://scicomp.stackexchange.com/questions/923/what-simple-methods-are-there-for-adaptively-sampling-a-2d-function: Keep. I feel like this question is limited in scope. I don't think it would be easy for anyone in the scientific community to come in and post an answer to that question. http://scicomp.stackexchange.com/questions/660/venues-for-publishing-papers-that-emphasize-software: Keep for now. Ah, this question. I like this question, but I'd badger some people about making their answers better. One of the problems I have with journal questions is that the potential for abuse is too great, which is why I wanted to close it. There are a lot of journals out there, and any exhaustive list would be long, which makes me think it's easy fodder for newcomers to the site. Part of me is a little concerned that the vote system could in some way be construed as a popularity indicator of journals. All of these reasons are treading over old ground, though. 2 Migration of MSO links to MSE links edited Apr 23 '14 at 8:53 1 answered Feb 14 '12 at 6:56 Geoff Oxberry 28.2k99 silver badges2121 bronze badges