Another hot take on discovery systems
I was in the process of doing some thesis research (ie trying to stave off imposter syndrome) and it happened again. Here's a citation I came across in a very useful survey article for the exact thing I need to pretend to be an expert in.
Yup, pretty dubious, but it was in a paper with about 120 citations (many of which I've come across before). This situation has happened before and I was interested in trying to locate this document.
I tried searching for:
the number of partitions in pollard rho
Similar to last time. Not a thing.
Exactly what I wanted, first result. Plus some other stuff which to me seems to be other versions of the document.
Bonus Round: Google Scholar
Using the Library-Lunch-Eater (tm) I got an even more concise answer
I'll reiterate basically. A piece of research that didn't have some final published form and therfore (no matter how important it is to the topic) didn't make the cut for inclusion in the discovery index. Which (I'm waving my hands around here a bunch) has some bad side effects for the OA and grey lit that we like to promote in the Library. We flog these venues/products as important parts of research but they don't show up in our tools.
I have spent a few years working in a Library now so I have an understanding of what it offers, if I was an uninitiated grad student I'd just probably go straight to Dr. G and not bother with the Library offerings.
Google just needs to put some effort into it and I think they would totally eat our lunch for about 99.9% of academic research.