Monday, March 26, 2012

we received this comment by email

Almost all the IEEE Conferences are WITHOUT review.
It is enough for the organizers to ensure the Co-sponsorship of IEEE and then it is enough to start advertisements by email or in the local scientific magazines of their country that they are authorized to run an "IEEE" conference (or "IEEE" multiconference). They print out great advertizing posters with a very big picture of IEEE logo. Sometimes they make several phone calls. They know that the personal phone calls are better than the Email Spam. I was called by a colleague last December to participate in his IEEE conference. I told him that I am not an expert in the field of this conference, but he insisted that I am inside the scopes of the meeting. I sent them 5 papers. All of them passed without review.
When I asked them why I did not took any review, he told me "your papers were really excellent". I do not say that my papers were bad, but at least, I wanted to have some opinions, some comments, some ideas. I was waiting for them, but nothing. Finally, we made some negotations with registration fees. With 5 accepted papers I had to pay 2000 Dollars. Fortunately, my "good" colleague made a generous discount for me and I paid only 1500 Dollars providing that I would say good comments and positive opinion for his IEEE conference to my friends. I did it. However, I am writing you now the truth for this bogus IEEE conference.

Thursday, March 22, 2012

SIAM and IEEE work in the same way.

SIAM and IEEE work in the same way. They sell their (bad) name to dubious conference organizers for some royalties. To accept papers based on a quick review in their abstracts is unacceptable, unethical and quite risky. This is the reason that IEEE and SIAM conferences have accepted so many SCIgen fake papers. So, the book of Abstracts especially of many SIAM conferences is a real festival of fake papers that can be classfied as follows

a) fake papers (like SCIgen or like the paper: "mathematical psychology of insects" that published in SIAM last year) that are submitted intentionally

b) wrong papers from suckers that believed that they discovered a new theory of relativity or they believe that they will correct Einstein's theorems or will resolve the last theorem of Fermat. These are not SCIgen papers, but are papers of suckers. They pay 300-500 USD and then
they cock in their family or in their neighborhood that they have proved the ... Fermat's last theorem.

c) some ideas of some people in their Abstract without any implementation of the main part of their paper. For example: "plantations on the moon or on the Mars", or "on a new medicament for the cancer therapy" and many other "good things" in the Abstract (sounds good) but without any real implementation in the real part of the articles.