I agree with this. I also think that there should be more acceptance of “resource” papers. eg if someone has made a massive multimodal resource with an interesting and useful experimental design (this bit is essential!) then that should be enough for a fancy journal.
Will Macnair
@willmacnair
Senior Scientist working on single cell neuroscience @ Roche.
Formerly postdoc with @markrobinsonca @ UZH.
Big fan of allowing yourself space to be wrong.
Formerly postdoc with @markrobinsonca @ UZH.
Big fan of allowing yourself space to be wrong.
389 Following 482 Followers 747 Posts
Latest posts 5
When people developed ML for images, they had feedback along the way: “still too many fingers” etc.
People are now doing the same for single cell data, w/o this feedback loop…😬
Can someone convince me that sc foundation models are not just expensive batch effect generators??
People are now doing the same for single cell data, w/o this feedback loop…😬
Can someone convince me that sc foundation models are not just expensive batch effect generators??
Interesting data!
Interpretation 1: Financial security gives freedom to fully pursue interests, and if there was more equality we would see many top scientists from all backgrounds
Interpretation 2: Ambition at a psychopathic level is heritable 😜
Interpretation 1: Financial security gives freedom to fully pursue interests, and if there was more equality we would see many top scientists from all backgrounds
Interpretation 2: Ambition at a psychopathic level is heritable 😜
What kind of childhood makes a top scientist? Is it enough to have all the right traits (brilliance, grit, etc) or do you need the right family too?View quoted post on X
And why should we care? A 🧵 on our paper on the Nobel Laureates.
A teaser: the income distribution of the laureates' fathers.1/N
💯 For me, Nobels mislead non-scientists on how scientific progress is really made.
Sure, there are smart people who accelerate progress a bit, but most progress is incremental and comes from *thousands* of scientists working and disagreeing and building with each other.
Sure, there are smart people who accelerate progress a bit, but most progress is incremental and comes from *thousands* of scientists working and disagreeing and building with each other.
Excellent article on the human impacts of scientific fraud.
For this and other reasons, I think academic science has a huge accountability problem.
Freedom is absolutely necessary to allow discovery of new things, but there needs to be waaaay more checking of the findings.
For this and other reasons, I think academic science has a huge accountability problem.
Freedom is absolutely necessary to allow discovery of new things, but there needs to be waaaay more checking of the findings.
Science is built on trust. What happens when someone destroys it?View quoted post on X
My first feature for @_TheTransmitter investigates the emotional and existential fallout for one lab in the aftermath of a misconduct case.
thetransmitter.org/science-and-so…