Comment from Jonathan Kujawa
Jonathan KujawaOpposeAcademic
Summary: A mathematics professor is opposing the proposed revisions because they believe the rules would restrict professional expenses, hinder the communication of scientific results, and place excessive scrutiny on scientists. The commenter argues that these restrictions would delay American innovation and damage the ability of researchers to stay at the cutting edge of their fields.
[200.432, 200.454, 200.461, 200.206, 200.450]
To Whom it May Concern:
I am a professor of mathematics with over twenty years of experience in research, teaching, and mentoring.
I am writing in my personal capacity to oppose the proposed revisions to sections 200.432, 200.454, 200.461, 200.206, and 200.450 that would restrict typical professional expenses, curtail the communication of scientific results, and place excessive scrutiny on the activities of scientists.
My membership in the American Mathematical Society has been an invaluable source of professional and scientific information.
Regularly attending conferences, in both the United States and abroad, is absolutely essential to staying at the cutting edge of research. Results typically appear in publications several years after they are discussed at scientific meetings. Slowing the dissemination of scientific knowledge would only hobble and delay American innovation. As an example, I just attended a conference in Europe and learned of a new result that will allow me to make a breakthrough on a problem that has been outstanding for more than a decade. It will probably be a year or more before that result appears in a journal. Without the ability to freely participate in the relevant meetings, my ability to leverage others' work in my own research will be severely damaged.
I typically publish two to four papers per year, a rate that is considered typical of a productive mathematician in my research areas. Being able to publish that work in appropriate journals in a timely way is an important way to disseminate my research.
Restrictions on the publication and dissemination of research will impede the speed and effectiveness of American progress and innovation. Not only is it important for assessing individual researchers, but a healthy publication ecosystem is also an important part of the checks and balances necessary to ensure the research community on the whole is focusing its limited attention on the most important and fruitful areas of research.