# An intriguing invitation from Advances in Pure Mathematics

Now here’s an offer that’s pretty hard to resist.

Date: Sat, 20 Apr 2013 09:06:39
To: neldredge@math.cornell.edu

Today I received the first check from Lulu with the proceeds from the first few months of Mathgen book sales: US\$76.32. I’ve just dispatched a check for the same amount to the American Mathematical Society. Thanks to all who bought the books! Not only do you now own a fantastic conversation piece, but you’ve helped support real (non-randomly generated) mathematics research! And for those who haven’t: you still can. Update: In the interests of transparency, here is the receipt (PDF). # Another Mathgen paper accepted Stefan Friedl of the University of Cologne writes with the news that he has gotten a Mathgen paper accepted by Journal of Algebra and Number Theory Academia. (Yes, that’s really the name of the journal; it was nominated for Clunkiest New Journal Title of 2010.) Friedl’s masterpiece is entitled “On the uniqueness of prime, Jacobi functors”; you can read the manuscript (PDF). Its abstract: Let$\delta^{(\Omega)} \le i$be arbitrary. Every student is aware that every factor is independent. We show that$\bar{f}$is co-trivial and extrinsic. In this context, the results of [32] are highly relevant. On the other hand, in [32], the authors address the reversibility of additive scalars under the additional assumption that there exists a compactly semi-Monge locally symmetric monodromy. The anonymous referee’s report offers unqualified praise for this magnificent paper: I have gone through the paper. It is a good paper. In my view the results obtained are original, new and interesting. This paper may trigger further research in the direction of work. Clarity: This paper is well-written and well-presented. Literature: The authors’ references to the literature seem adequate. Interest: Readers of the journal will find this paper interesting. Recommendation: I recommend that this paper be accepted for publication in the Journal for Algebra and Number Theory Academia. Unlike Advances in Pure Mathematics, JANTA is not an open-access journal but is available only by subscription; current subscription rates are US\$300 per year (6 issues). They do, however, require that the author pay an “article processing charge” of US\\$20 per page. Friedl also points out that JANTA is indexed by Zentralblatt, a well-respected review database.

Congratulations to Stefan for his successful work!

# Merry Christmas from Advances in Pure Mathematics!

Date: Mon, 24 Dec 2012 11:25:19
From: srp
To: marcie.rathke@gmail.com
Subject: Dr.Marcie Rathke, Merry X'mas

Dear Marcie Rathke,

Merry Christmas and Happy New Year! On behalf of the SCIRP editorial staffs, I would like to extend my profound gratitude to you, for your consistent support to our journal.

It is our firm belief that with our joint efforts, the journals of SCIRP will make further progress in the next year.

Wishing you health and happiness in the Holiday Season and prosperity in the coming 2013.

My very best regards,

Scirp Editorial Office

# Gluttons for punishment

I just received the following email:

CALL FOR PAPERS

ISSN Online: 2160-0384

Dear Dr. Nathaniel Eldredge,

I am writing to cordially invite you to submit or recommend papers to the Advances in Pure Mathematics (APM, ISSN: 2160-0384), an open access journal. For more about the Aims & Scope or other information, please visit the following website: www.scirp.org/journal/apm.

# On “provisional acceptance”

With regard to the Marcie Rathke affair, a number of readers have seized on the provisional nature of the acceptance letter from Advances in Pure Mathematics. Indeed, they did not accept it outright, for the referee says that certain revisions are needed: rewrite the abstract, explain the notation, include proofs of the main result and key lemmas. Some said that since these revisions would either be impossible or would result in a totally different (non-nonsensical) paper, that this lets APM off the hook. Others suggested that this sort of “acceptance” was actually a rejection intended to let the author down more gently.

If so, it would be completely at odds with the review practices that are usual in mathematics.