Why the paper CERN-PH-EP-2009-015 (arXiv:0903.4762) is scientifically unacceptable

The paper CERN-PH-EP-2009-015 (arXiv:0903.4762) by A. Bagulya et al. violates standards of quality of work and scientific ethics on several counts. The paper contains assertions that contradict established detector physics. The paper falls short of proving the correctness of the authors' concep...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Bolshakova, A., Boyko, I., Chelkov, G., Dedovitch, D., Elagin, A., Gostkin, M., Guskov, A., Kroumchtein, Z., Nefedov, Yu., Nikolaev, K., Zhemchugov, A., Dydak, F., Wotschack, J., De Min, A., Ammosov, V., Gapienko, V., Koreshev, V., Semak, A., Sviridov, Yu., Usenko, E., Zaets, V.
Lenguaje:eng
Publicado: 2009
Materias:
Detectors and Experimental Techniques
Acceso en línea:http://cds.cern.ch/record/1206969
_version_ 1780917940491649024
author Bolshakova, A.
Boyko, I.
Chelkov, G.
Dedovitch, D.
Elagin, A.
Gostkin, M.
Guskov, A.
Kroumchtein, Z.
Nefedov, Yu.
Nikolaev, K.
Zhemchugov, A.
Dydak, F.
Wotschack, J.
De Min, A.
Ammosov, V.
Gapienko, V.
Koreshev, V.
Semak, A.
Sviridov, Yu.
Usenko, E.
Zaets, V.
author_facet Bolshakova, A.
Boyko, I.
Chelkov, G.
Dedovitch, D.
Elagin, A.
Gostkin, M.
Guskov, A.
Kroumchtein, Z.
Nefedov, Yu.
Nikolaev, K.
Zhemchugov, A.
Dydak, F.
Wotschack, J.
De Min, A.
Ammosov, V.
Gapienko, V.
Koreshev, V.
Semak, A.
Sviridov, Yu.
Usenko, E.
Zaets, V.
author_sort Bolshakova, A.
collection CERN
description The paper CERN-PH-EP-2009-015 (arXiv:0903.4762) by A. Bagulya et al. violates standards of quality of work and scientific ethics on several counts. The paper contains assertions that contradict established detector physics. The paper falls short of proving the correctness of the authors' concepts and results. The paper ignores or quotes misleadingly pertinent published work. The paper ignores the fact that the authors' concepts and results have already been shown wrong in the published literature. The authors seem unaware that cross-section results from the 'HARP Collaboration' that are based on the paper's concepts and algorithms are in gross disagreement with the results of a second analysis of the same data, and with the results of other experiments.
id cern-1206969
institution Organización Europea para la Investigación Nuclear
language eng
publishDate 2009
record_format invenio
spelling cern-12069692019-09-30T06:29:59Zhttp://cds.cern.ch/record/1206969engBolshakova, A.Boyko, I.Chelkov, G.Dedovitch, D.Elagin, A.Gostkin, M.Guskov, A.Kroumchtein, Z.Nefedov, Yu.Nikolaev, K.Zhemchugov, A.Dydak, F.Wotschack, J.De Min, A.Ammosov, V.Gapienko, V.Koreshev, V.Semak, A.Sviridov, Yu.Usenko, E.Zaets, V.Why the paper CERN-PH-EP-2009-015 (arXiv:0903.4762) is scientifically unacceptableDetectors and Experimental TechniquesThe paper CERN-PH-EP-2009-015 (arXiv:0903.4762) by A. Bagulya et al. violates standards of quality of work and scientific ethics on several counts. The paper contains assertions that contradict established detector physics. The paper falls short of proving the correctness of the authors' concepts and results. The paper ignores or quotes misleadingly pertinent published work. The paper ignores the fact that the authors' concepts and results have already been shown wrong in the published literature. The authors seem unaware that cross-section results from the 'HARP Collaboration' that are based on the paper's concepts and algorithms are in gross disagreement with the results of a second analysis of the same data, and with the results of other experiments.The paper CERN-PH-EP-2009-015 (arXiv:0903.4762) by A. Bagulya et al. violates standards of quality of work and scientific ethics on several counts. The paper contains assertions that contradict established detector physics. The paper falls short of proving the correctness of the authors' concepts and results. The paper ignores or quotes misleadingly pertinent published work. The paper ignores the fact that the authors' concepts and results have already been shown wrong in the published literature. The authors seem unaware that cross-section results from the 'HARP Collaboration' that are based on the paper's concepts and algorithms are in gross disagreement with the results of a second analysis of the same data, and with the results of other experiments.arXiv:0909.2745oai:cds.cern.ch:12069692009-09-16
spellingShingle Detectors and Experimental Techniques
Bolshakova, A.
Boyko, I.
Chelkov, G.
Dedovitch, D.
Elagin, A.
Gostkin, M.
Guskov, A.
Kroumchtein, Z.
Nefedov, Yu.
Nikolaev, K.
Zhemchugov, A.
Dydak, F.
Wotschack, J.
De Min, A.
Ammosov, V.
Gapienko, V.
Koreshev, V.
Semak, A.
Sviridov, Yu.
Usenko, E.
Zaets, V.
Why the paper CERN-PH-EP-2009-015 (arXiv:0903.4762) is scientifically unacceptable
title Why the paper CERN-PH-EP-2009-015 (arXiv:0903.4762) is scientifically unacceptable
title_full Why the paper CERN-PH-EP-2009-015 (arXiv:0903.4762) is scientifically unacceptable
title_fullStr Why the paper CERN-PH-EP-2009-015 (arXiv:0903.4762) is scientifically unacceptable
title_full_unstemmed Why the paper CERN-PH-EP-2009-015 (arXiv:0903.4762) is scientifically unacceptable
title_short Why the paper CERN-PH-EP-2009-015 (arXiv:0903.4762) is scientifically unacceptable
title_sort why the paper cern-ph-ep-2009-015 (arxiv:0903.4762) is scientifically unacceptable
topic Detectors and Experimental Techniques
url http://cds.cern.ch/record/1206969
work_keys_str_mv AT bolshakovaa whythepapercernphep2009015arxiv09034762isscientificallyunacceptable
AT boykoi whythepapercernphep2009015arxiv09034762isscientificallyunacceptable
AT chelkovg whythepapercernphep2009015arxiv09034762isscientificallyunacceptable
AT dedovitchd whythepapercernphep2009015arxiv09034762isscientificallyunacceptable
AT elagina whythepapercernphep2009015arxiv09034762isscientificallyunacceptable
AT gostkinm whythepapercernphep2009015arxiv09034762isscientificallyunacceptable
AT guskova whythepapercernphep2009015arxiv09034762isscientificallyunacceptable
AT kroumchteinz whythepapercernphep2009015arxiv09034762isscientificallyunacceptable
AT nefedovyu whythepapercernphep2009015arxiv09034762isscientificallyunacceptable
AT nikolaevk whythepapercernphep2009015arxiv09034762isscientificallyunacceptable
AT zhemchugova whythepapercernphep2009015arxiv09034762isscientificallyunacceptable
AT dydakf whythepapercernphep2009015arxiv09034762isscientificallyunacceptable
AT wotschackj whythepapercernphep2009015arxiv09034762isscientificallyunacceptable
AT demina whythepapercernphep2009015arxiv09034762isscientificallyunacceptable
AT ammosovv whythepapercernphep2009015arxiv09034762isscientificallyunacceptable
AT gapienkov whythepapercernphep2009015arxiv09034762isscientificallyunacceptable
AT koreshevv whythepapercernphep2009015arxiv09034762isscientificallyunacceptable
AT semaka whythepapercernphep2009015arxiv09034762isscientificallyunacceptable
AT sviridovyu whythepapercernphep2009015arxiv09034762isscientificallyunacceptable
AT usenkoe whythepapercernphep2009015arxiv09034762isscientificallyunacceptable
AT zaetsv whythepapercernphep2009015arxiv09034762isscientificallyunacceptable

Ejemplares similares