Memorandum submitted by Dr Marta Mazzocco,
Dr Alexander Strohmaier and Professor Eugene Ferapontov, Loughborough
University (FC 81)
As previous investigations into the subject
have shown (see the article by Jaffe, SIAM review vol 26, no 4
October 1984 prepared for the Ad Hoc Committee on Resources for
the Mathematical Sciences, chaired by Edward David, USA) that
the impact that mathematics and science in general has in the
long term can not be predicted at all. The use of number theory
in modern cryptography, or the use the differential geometry in
GPS systems, were not foreseen at the time in which these theories
were developed. These two examples are typical (as shown in Jaffe
article).
The scientific peer review process already now
deals with questions like:
"why is the research important or interesting"
and the scientists are well aware about the role their science
plays in the public. There is no need at all for any additional
impact measurement. On the contrary: Any such measurements will
result only on the focus on short term turnaround.
The current banking crisis was caused by a system
that rewarded bankers for immediate turnarounds and short time
successes. Introducing additional impact measurement implements
the same failed system in science.
We would like also to mention the recent article
by Douglas N Arnold, president of SIAM (Society for Industrial
and Applied Mathematics, where the negative effect of the "impact
factor" (a way to measure how interesting a scientif publication
is) is analyzed. http://www.siam.org/news/news.php?id=1663.
Dr Marta Mazzocco
Dr Alexander Strohmaier
Professor Eugene Ferapontov
Loughborough University
| 
