Post History

Source: https://writers.stackexchange.com/q/48352
License name: CC BY-SA 4.0
License URL: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

I am reviewing a computer science submission to an academic conference. The authors use "randvar" instead of "random variable" (as well as "logvar" instead of "logical variable").

I am wondering if, as a reviewer (albeit technical -- there are no editorial reviewers in this conference), I should insist on them using the expanded form. "Randvar" is not standard in computer science or statistics. For example, I've never seen it used in a textbook.

One slight complication is that most papers that use "random variables" do not use "logical variables", but in the specific sub-field to which this paper belongs, both types of variables are used, so it makes a bit more sense to be talking about both types of variables more often, and then it becomes long-winded to be using "random variable" all the time.

Other papers in this specific sub-field use "logvar" more often, but "logical variable" is pretty specific to this sub-field as well, so both are unusual and therefore "logvar" does not seem to be sacrificing much; if you are going to coin a technical term, might as well use the most convenient form. But "random variable" on the other hand is a lot more established across multiple fields and it seems more radical to abbreviate it like this.

Also, of course, there is a page limit and this saves the authors precious space.

Any ideas on this?

Original score: 3