# How long to hear back about quick opinion

1. Top Mathematician
ccot

from annals? Maybe it depends on how obviously unsuitable our paper is?

1 weekccot
Quote 0 Up 0 Down Report
2. Top Mathematician
iwyb

You might get a rejection in a month, or you might have to wait three years.

1 weekiwyb
Quote 2 Up 0 Down Report
3. Top Mathematician
aqjc

I’ve heard more and more stories of it taking 1-2 years for a quick opinion to reject. Not sure why it’s taking so long.

1 weekaqjc
Quote 2 Up 0 Down Report
4. Top Mathematician
rrqv

ok that's ridiculous

1 weekrrqv
Quote 1 Up 0 Down Report
5. Top Mathematician

I once gave a quick opinion to reject 8 months after I was asked, and the paper was already a couple of months with the editor. Reason: I forgot and no one reminded me.

Quote 6 Up 4 Down Report
6. Top Mathematician
jxix

I once gave a quick opinion to reject 8 months after I was asked, and the paper was already a couple of months with the editor. Reason: I forgot and no one reminded me.

I hope this is a joke. If not, you should be ashamed of yourself.

1 weekjxix
Quote 12 Up 7 Down Report
7. Top Mathematician
crip

If the first few quick opinions are in conflict, they get more quick opinions. They also sometimes circle back to previous quick opinion givers, to show them later quick opinions. The bar is so high, there's no point in proceeding if a paper has a persistently negative quick opinion from someone they trust.

1 weekcrip
Quote 1 Up 0 Down Report
8. Top Mathematician
xdbc

If the first few quick opinions are in conflict, they get more quick opinions. They also sometimes circle back to previous quick opinion givers, to show them later quick opinions. The bar is so high, there's no point in proceeding if a paper has a persistently negative quick opinion from someone they trust.

Wouldn't they trust anyone they asked? Why would you ask someone you don't trust?

1 weekxdbc
Quote 0 Up 0 Down Report
9. Top Mathematician
crip

Wouldn't they trust anyone they asked? Why would you ask someone you don't trust?

You ask a mix of people. Some are specialists on the particular topic -- and therefore are more likely to think the topic is very important. From them you're trying to get a sense of whether the paper is likely to be correct and the result or methods valuable. Other people you ask aren't specialists but are known as being broadly knowledgeable about the more general area of the paper. They give a more unbiased view of whether the topic is important.

1 weekcrip
Quote 3 Up 1 Down Report
10. Top Mathematician
rrqv

Wouldn't they trust anyone they asked? Why would you ask someone you don't trust?

You ask a mix of people. Some are specialists on the particular topic -- and therefore are more likely to think the topic is very important. From them you're trying to get a sense of whether the paper is likely to be correct and the result or methods valuable. Other people you ask aren't specialists but are known as being broadly knowledgeable about the more general area of the paper. They give a more unbiased view of whether the topic is important.

thanks, crip

1 weekrrqv
Quote 4 Up 0 Down Report
11. Top Mathematician
urko

I once gave a quick opinion to reject 8 months after I was asked, and the paper was already a couple of months with the editor. Reason: I forgot and no one reminded me.

If the authors were junior, you may have ended a career here.

1 weekurko
Quote 17 Up 0 Down Report
12. Top Mathematician

I once gave a quick opinion to reject 8 months after I was asked, and the paper was already a couple of months with the editor. Reason: I forgot and no one reminded me.

If the authors were junior, you may have ended a career here.

I know, I know... on the other hand the paper was not too good either. It was the kind of things that some people know that should work, but nobody really wants to write down because it is not the main point of the problem.

Quote 1 Up 9 Down Report
13. Top Mathematician
slqc

from annals? Maybe it depends on how obviously unsuitable our paper is?

You won’t necessarily hear if the quicksand are positive

1 weekslqc
Quote 0 Up 0 Down Report
14. Top Mathematician
uria
[...]

If the authors were junior, you may have ended a career here.

I know, I know... on the other hand the paper was not too good either. It was the kind of things that some people know that should work, but nobody really wants to write down because it is not the main point of the problem.

i've gotten these sort of papers into TAMS or even AJM level journals. Sure the result might be unsurprising or expected at a certain point, but there's still a need to actually do it and carry out the details. Unfair to assume a result without actually proving it. Hate it when people who talk out of their ass just dismissively say something should follow when it might not. But then again, a TAMS won't change their job outcome. Still you should feel bad.

1 weekuria
Quote 6 Up 0 Down Report
15. Top Mathematician
[...]

I know, I know... on the other hand the paper was not too good either. It was the kind of things that some people know that should work, but nobody really wants to write down because it is not the main point of the problem.

i've gotten these sort of papers into TAMS or even AJM level journals. Sure the result might be unsurprising or expected at a certain point, but there's still a need to actually do it and carry out the details. Unfair to assume a result without actually proving it. Hate it when people who talk out of their ass just dismissively say something should follow when it might not. But then again, a TAMS won't change their job outcome. Still you should feel bad.

This was above Duke, hence the outcome. At the end the paper was published in Duke, which I think was fair.

Quote 0 Up 2 Down Report
16. Top Mathematician
behb

I've heard of quick-opinion-rejects from Annals after 2 years. Whoever is involved in this kind of stuff should be blacklisted as referee.

1 weekbehb
Quote 8 Up 0 Down Report
17. Top Mathematician
jhtk
[...]

I know, I know... on the other hand the paper was not too good either. It was the kind of things that some people know that should work, but nobody really wants to write down because it is not the main point of the problem.

i've gotten these sort of papers into TAMS or even AJM level journals. Sure the result might be unsurprising or expected at a certain point, but there's still a need to actually do it and carry out the details. Unfair to assume a result without actually proving it. Hate it when people who talk out of their ass just dismissively say something should follow when it might not. But then again, a TAMS won't change their job outcome. Still you should feel bad.

TAMS papers will change job outcomes outside the top 25-30 for sure. People on this site writing like only top 5s matter for all candidates - it isn't true.

1 weekjhtk
Quote 6 Up 1 Down Report
18. Top Mathematician
uria
[...]

i've gotten these sort of papers into TAMS or even AJM level journals. Sure the result might be unsurprising or expected at a certain point, but there's still a need to actually do it and carry out the details. Unfair to assume a result without actually proving it. Hate it when people who talk out of their ass just dismissively say something should follow when it might not. But then again, a TAMS won't change their job outcome. Still you should feel bad.

This was above Duke, hence the outcome. At the end the paper was published in Duke, which I think was fair.

Wow, you actually may have cost this person a job or at the very least a whole job cycle. The Duke paper coming 8 months sooner may have gotten them a really good job as opposed to doing a second postdoc and reapplying.

1 weekuria
Quote 4 Up 0 Down Report
19. Top Mathematician
utkg

I've heard of quick-opinion-rejects from Annals after 2 years. Whoever is involved in this kind of stuff should be blacklisted as referee.

they should not just be blacklisted, they should be publicly shamed

1 weekutkg
Quote 3 Up 0 Down Report
20. Top Mathematician
uria

I've heard of quick-opinion-rejects from Annals after 2 years. Whoever is involved in this kind of stuff should be blacklisted as referee.

they should not just be blacklisted, they should be publicly shamed

at that point it's the editor's fault for waiting for them and not finding another person for quick opinion.

1 weekuria
Quote 4 Up 0 Down Report
Your screen is so tiny that we decided to disable the captcha and posting feature
Store settings & IDs (locally, encrypted)
Formatting guidelines: Commonmark with no images and html allowed. $and$\$ for LaTeX. Input previewed in last post of thread. For a link to be allowed it must include the http(s) tag and come from the list of allowed domains.