On the City Names for Anonymous Institute Labels

[Tristan Hehnen]

If the institutes are to be kept anonymous by giving them city names as labels, I strongly suggest to adjust the rules to pick said labels and to change the already picked city names accordingly. There are three aspects I would like to suggest for the rules to be followed:

1. Only a single word.

2. As few letters as possible.

3. No special characters, e.g. no: accents, dashes, spaces, underscores, umlaut etc..

Since this labeling is "made up" anyway, it could (and in my view should) be simplified.

Still, I would much prefer if the actual institute names and labels could be used.

Tristan

[Randy McDermott]

I agree with Tristan.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "MaCFP Condensed Phase Discussions" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to macfp-condensed-phase-...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/macfp-condensed-phase-discussions/316b272e-1e94-483d-b731-da0b5e96cd63n%40googlegroups.com.

[Morgan Bruns]

I agree about coming up with simpler naming conventions. Since we have a small enough number of labs, alphabetical naming would work ("A", "B", "C", ...).

I still think being consistently anonymous would have been better for the reasons I've previously stated. Personally, I'm okay dropping the pretense to anonymity since the cat's out of the bag on GitHub, but the committee seems to be generally in favor of maintaining surface anonymity in the report.

Morgan

On Mon, Oct 26, 2020 at 9:30 AM Tristan Hehnen <tristan...@gmail.com> wrote:

--

[Tristan Hehnen]

Under the given conditions (anonymity), it seems to me that short city names could be better, since this approach would allow to easily add more institutes in the future if necessary.

[Morgan Bruns]

You're more optimistic than I am! But I agree that having something more "scalable" is better.

Morgan

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/macfp-condensed-phase-discussions/eea98661-3e96-4e64-b2f7-c454ed52a59en%40googlegroups.com.

[Randy McDermott]

Yes, if the institutions are identified in the database, we are wasting time and complicating an already complicated process by scrambling the names.  In the long run, we will discover that the database is used far more than a pdf document.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/macfp-condensed-phase-discussions/CAPbSjgnApfoSgMX3%3DXdstNvdJB13S9LdWM85HTkGa46b5PTRag%40mail.gmail.com.

[Morgan Bruns]

From what I can tell, anonymity was never discussed in the call for data. So I don't think that labs were given the expectation of anonymity.

Why don't I check with the committee before we move forward with another set of anonymous names? I would have preferred us to be consistently anonymous for this first round, but that battle's been inadvertently lost, and it will make things easier if we just use real lab names moving forward.

Morgan

On Mon, Oct 26, 2020 at 11:46 AM Alvear Portilla, Manuel Daniel <daniel...@unican.es> wrote:

Dear all,

If anonymity was indicated during the design of this… in any case we do not mind actual names appear.

My main concern is related to clarify the testing conditions in each lab since there seem to be important differences.

Best regards

Daniel

 

 

 

	Daniel Alvear, Ph.D. Head of GIDAI / Associate Professor Departament of Transports & Technology of Projects and Processes E.T.S. Ingenieros Industriales y de Telec. Avda de Los Castros, s/n. 39005 Santander UNIVERSITY OF CANTABRIA
		Tel. + 34 942 20 18 26 Email: alv...@unican.es

 

  Antes de imprimir este mensaje, asegúrate de que es necesario. Proteger el medio ambiente está en tus manos.

 

The information transmitted is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon, this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you received this in error, please contact the sender and delete the material from any computer.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/macfp-condensed-phase-discussions/CAC6wax1J52p4NMgx4wEZ5PkYakr%2BW4UoGyeOKx4aweSiaFcBwg%40mail.gmail.com.

[Bjarne Paulsen Husted]

For our part is does not have to be anonymous.

Either for the data obtained at DBI or at Lund University 

Br

Bjarne Husted

Sendt fra min iPhone

Den 26. okt. 2020 kl. 17.26 skrev Morgan Bruns <morgan.ch...@gmail.com>:



From what I can tell, anonymity was never discussed in the call for data. So I don't think that labs were given the expectation of anonymity.

Why don't I check with the committee before we move forward with another set of anonymous names? I would have preferred us to be consistently anonymous for this first round, but that battle's been inadvertently lost, and it will make things easier if we just use real lab names moving forward.

Morgan

On Mon, Oct 26, 2020 at 11:46 AM Alvear Portilla, Manuel Daniel <daniel...@unican.es> wrote:

Dear all,

If anonymity was indicated during the design of this… in any case we do not mind actual names appear.

My main concern is related to clarify the testing conditions in each lab since there seem to be important differences.

Best regards

Daniel

 

 

 

<image001.png> <image007.jpg>

Daniel Alvear, Ph.D. Head of GIDAI / Associate Professor Departament of Transports & Technology of Projects and Processes E.T.S. Ingenieros Industriales y de Telec. Avda de Los Castros, s/n. 39005 Santander UNIVERSITY OF CANTABRIA

	<image008.jpg> <image009.jpg>   <image010.jpg>

Tel. + 34 942 20 18 26 Email: alv...@unican.es

 

<image011.jpg>

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/macfp-condensed-phase-discussions/316b272e-1e94-483d-b731-da0b5e96cd63n%40googlegroups.com..

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "MaCFP Condensed Phase Discussions" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to macfp-condensed-phase-...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/macfp-condensed-phase-discussions/eea98661-3e96-4e64-b2f7-c454ed52a59en%40googlegroups.com..

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "MaCFP Condensed Phase Discussions" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to macfp-condensed-phase-...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/macfp-condensed-phase-discussions/CAPbSjgnApfoSgMX3%3DXdstNvdJB13S9LdWM85HTkGa46b5PTRag%40mail.gmail.com..

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "MaCFP Condensed Phase Discussions" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to macfp-condensed-phase-...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/macfp-condensed-phase-discussions/CAC6wax1J52p4NMgx4wEZ5PkYakr%2BW4UoGyeOKx4aweSiaFcBwg%40mail.gmail.com..

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "MaCFP Condensed Phase Discussions" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to macfp-condensed-phase-...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/macfp-condensed-phase-discussions/CAPbSjgkLFSRWwg_-3j6%2Bk4C8o2d1CX4OgTFwTm9_GeQC1HfKwQ%40mail.gmail.com..