<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>Correctness is not enough · HackerPapers discussions</title><link>https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/0808.2045/</link><description>Collected HN comments and submissions linking this paper.</description><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Mon, 02 Nov 2026 11:16:22 GMT</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/0808.2045/feed.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" /><item><title>Correctness is not enough — mentioned by DanBC</title><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5200402</link><guid isPermaLink="false">urn:hackerpapers:mention:0808.2045:5200402</guid><pubDate>Mon, 11 Feb 2013 12:12:52 GMT</pubDate><description>&lt;p&gt;Correctness is not enough. (http://arxiv.org/abs/0808.2045) &amp;gt; The usual aim of spreadsheet audit is to verify correctness. There are two problems with this: first, it is often difficult to tell whether the spreadsheets in question are correct, and second, even if they are, they may still give the wrong results. You&amp;#x27;re assuming that people know what model to use; use the correct model; implement it correctly; and use the correct inputs for that model. Since most of these ad-hoc spreadsheets don&amp;#x27;t have any kind of specification, let alone a formal spec, it&amp;#x27;s really hard to know what they&amp;#x27;re…&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/0808.2045/"&gt;Paper and discussion history&lt;/a&gt;. A mention is not an endorsement.&lt;/p&gt;</description><category>cs.SE</category></item></channel></rss>
