While discussing different strategies for revamping peer review in order to eliminate some of its many flaws, I came up with a benchmark to test any system’s false dismissal rate against. (Many consider peer review to have failed only if it accepts a paper that should have been rejected, but I consider the opposite a much more grave mistake).

A system is sufficient if it would have permitted Evariste Galois to publish his mathematical work. That’s it. Without changing any of his circumstances, including his general rejection by elite mathematicians (or government) of the time or the poor reputation of his academic institution, I am looking for a system that would have allowed him to circulate his papers (which would later prove revolutionary, after all) uninhibited.

Any system that fails this should be burdened under the knowledge that it would have denied us most of the field of abstract algebra and all ensuing discoveries – basically all of 20th century mathematics.