Path: ...!news.mixmin.net!news2.arglkargh.de!news.karotte.org!news.szaf.org!nntp-feed.chiark.greenend.org.uk!ewrotcd!news.eyrie.org!beagle.ediacara.org!.POSTED.beagle.ediacara.org!not-for-mail From: JTEM Newsgroups: talk.origins Subject: Re: ChatGPT contributing to current science papers Date: Sun, 11 Aug 2024 21:09:21 -0400 Organization: Eek Lines: 28 Sender: to%beagle.ediacara.org Approved: moderator@beagle.ediacara.org Message-ID: References: Reply-To: jtem01@gmail.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Injection-Info: beagle.ediacara.org; posting-host="beagle.ediacara.org:3.132.105.89"; logging-data="86349"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@beagle.ediacara.org" User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird To: talk-origins@moderators.isc.org Cancel-Lock: sha1:qFzQJRg8YJrTXpASOTlSUAO40sQ= Return-Path: X-Original-To: talk-origins@ediacara.org Delivered-To: talk-origins@ediacara.org id 37EB5229782; Sun, 11 Aug 2024 21:08:47 -0400 (EDT) by beagle.ediacara.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1D90E229765 for ; Sun, 11 Aug 2024 21:08:45 -0400 (EDT) id 599755DC2C; Mon, 12 Aug 2024 01:09:26 +0000 (UTC) Delivered-To: talk-origins@moderators.isc.org by mod-relay-1.kamens.us (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 37EF45DC26 for ; Mon, 12 Aug 2024 01:09:26 +0000 (UTC) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (P-256) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.eternal-september.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 09CE35F83E for ; Mon, 12 Aug 2024 01:09:22 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: name/09CE35F83E; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=gmail.com id 8F3BADC01A9; Mon, 12 Aug 2024 03:09:22 +0200 (CEST) X-Injection-Date: Mon, 12 Aug 2024 03:09:22 +0200 (CEST) X-Auth-Sender: U2FsdGVkX1+t4OlHtkWaZ3IOcWAH88Yw2QeJoA+4O9w= Content-Language: en-US In-Reply-To: FORGED_GMAIL_RCVD,FORGED_MUA_MOZILLA,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN, FREEMAIL_FROM,FREEMAIL_REPLYTO_END_DIGIT,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, NML_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE, URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 smtp.eternal-september.org Bytes: 3604 RonO wrote: > Peer review has it's flaws, but there is absolutely no doubt that it is > the best means we have for giving research it's first pass evaluation. It's irredeemably flawed. There needs to be transparency. The biggest danger, and it does happen, is good science being killed off by "Peer Review." How to stop it? Transparency. Let the rejected papers see the light of day. > Peer review can be manipulated (Sternberg and Meyer), and groups of > researchers have been exposed for recommending each others papers for > peer review (some journals ask the authors to recommend possible peer > reviewers in their field). Less concerned about bad science making it through. Science is self correcting. Science is repeatable or it isn't science. We can reasonably expect garbage to self correct. But the opposite isn't true. Good science that is kept from seeing the light of day is a loss to the world. -- https://jtem.tumblr.com/tagged/The%20Book%20of%20JTEM/page/5