We first hypothesize what target to make, driven by predictions of stability and properties. Second, we predict how to synthesize these targets. Third, we must understand what materials we made and whether they have the intended properties.
【方法】这段文字描述了材料发现的三个阶段循环方法，形成了一个完整的科学发现闭环。这种结构化的方法将复杂问题分解为可管理的步骤，但未详细说明每个阶段的具体算法或模型架构，以及如何处理各阶段之间的不确定性传递问题。
We created Neon by midtraining and reinforcement learning (RL) on data from our labs.
【方法】这段文字揭示了模型训练的具体方法，结合了midtraining和强化学习，使用实验室数据。这种方法将AI与实际科学实验数据紧密结合，但未详细说明数据集规模、质量评估方法或RL奖励函数的设计细节，这些因素对模型性能至关重要。
helping scientists move faster from question to evidence, from evidence to insight, and from insight to new treatments for patients.
这一描述将科学研究过程简化为三个明确阶段，暗示AI可能加速每个阶段的转换。这种简化反映了AI对科学过程的重新概念化，可能改变科学方法论的基本框架。
This system iteratively formulates scientific hypotheses, designs and executes experiments, analyzes and visualizes data, and autonomously authors scientific manuscripts.
从「提出假设」到「撰写论文」的完整科研周期，由一个系统自主完成——这是人类有史以来第一次把「科学发现」这件事本身自动化。令人震惊的是，这不是某种特定任务的自动化（比如蛋白质折叠或围棋），而是「做科研这件事」的自动化。这意味着 AI 开始具备自我迭代、自我升级的能力——因为科研本身就是产生更强 AI 的途径之一。
Sometimes members of the crew got a bit of money to support their research, sometimes not. Starshot did bring people together, though—in person and virtually—to talk about their personal research on those problems. “Breakthrough is essentially a set of meetings,” Lubin says. Other sources also cited meetings as a primary way scientists participated in the project.
compare his theoretical anticipations with the biological facts.
here he's outlining the idea of scientific method
Will artificial intelligence create useless class of people? - Yuval Noah Harari
1:00 "bring the latest findings of science of the public", otherwise the public space "gets filled with conspiracy theories and fake news and whatever".<br /> he fails to mention that ALL his beautiful "scientists" are financially dependent on corporations, who dictate the expected results, and who sabotage "unwanted research".<br /> for example, the pharma industry will NEVER pay money for research of natural cancer cures, or "alternative" covid cures like ivermectin / zinc / vitamin C, because these cures have no patent, so there is no profit motive, and also because the "militant pacifists" want to fix overpopulation this way.<br /> a "scientist" should be someone, who has all freedom to propose hypotheses, which then are tested in experiments (peer review), and compared to real placebo control groups. because that is science, or "the scientific method". everything else is lobbying for "shekel shekel".
Muchrecent scholarship on card indexes and factuality falls into one of two modes: first,scholars have excavated early modern indexes, catalogues, and the pursuit of ‘facts’to demonstrate information overload prior to the contemporary ‘information age’ as wellas the premodern attempts to counteract the firehose of books and other information(Blair, 2010; Krajewski, 2011; Mu ̈ ller-Wille and Scharf, 2009; Poovey, 1998;
Zedelmaier, 1992). All the same, a range of figures have tracked and critiqued the trajectory of the ‘noble dream’ of historical and scientific ‘objectivity’ (Appleby, Hunt and Jacob, 1994: 241-70; Daston and Galison, 2007; Novick, 1988).
Lustig categorizes scholarship on card indexes into two modes: understanding of information overload tools and the "trajectory of the 'noble dream' of historical and scientific 'objectivity'".
Heyde, Johannes Erich. Technik des wissenschaftlichen Arbeitens. (Sektion 1.2 Die Kartei) Junker und Dünnhaupt, 1931.
annotation target: urn:x-pdf:00126394ba28043d68444144cd504562
(Unknown translation from German into English. v1 TK)
The overall title of the work (in English: Technique of Scientific Work) calls immediately to mind the tradition of note taking growing out of the scientific historical methods work of Bernheim and Langlois/Seignobos and even more specifically the description of note taking by Beatrice Webb (1926) who explicitly used the phrase "recipe for scientific note-taking".
see: https://hypothes.is/a/BFWG2Ae1Ee2W1HM7oNTlYg
first reading: 2022-08-23 second reading: 2022-09-22
I suspect that this translation may be from Clemens in German to Scheper and thus potentially from the 1951 edition?
Heyde, Johannes Erich. Technik des wissenschaftlichen Arbeitens; eine Anleitung, besonders für Studierende. 8., Umgearb. Aufl. 1931. Reprint, Berlin: R. Kiepert, 1951.
Empiricism was thenew intellectual trend. Before this, just about any difficult question on anysubject at all could find a perfectly acceptable answer in authority of one kind oranother—in ‘It is God’s will’, rather than ‘Let’s find out’.
Thus Paxson was not content to limit historians to the immediateand the ascertainable. Historical truth must appear through some-thing short of scientific method, and in something other than scien-tific form, linked and geared to the unassimilable mass of facts.There was no standard technique suited to all persons and purposes,in note-taking or in composition. "The ordinary methods of his-torical narrative are ineffective before a theme that is in its essen-tials descriptive," he wrote of Archer B. Hulbert's Forty- Niners(1931) in 1932. "In some respects the story of the trails can notbe told until it is thrown into the form of epic poetry, or comes un-der the hand of the historical novelist." 42
This statement makes it appear as if Paxson was aware of the movement in the late 1800s of the attempt to make history a more scientific endeavor by writers like Bernheim, Langlois/Seignobos, and others, but that Pomeroy is less so.
How scientific can history be as an area of study? There is the descriptive from which we might draw conclusions, but how much can we know when there are not only so many potential variables, but we generally lack the ability to design and run discrete experiments on history itself?
Recall Paxson's earlier comment that "in history you cannot prove an inference". https://hypothes.is/a/LIWSoFlLEe2zUtvMoEr0nQ
Had enough time elapsed up to this writing in 1953, that the ideal of a scientific history from the late 1800s had been borne out not to be accomplished?
Neurath claimed that magic was unfalsifiable and therefore disenchantment could never be complete in a scientific age.[18]
- Josephson-Storm, Jason (2017). The Myth of Disenchantment: Magic, Modernity, and the Birth of the Human Sciences. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. p. 227. ISBN 978-0-226-40336-6.
Thus, the sensitive seismographer of avant-garde develop-ments, Walter Benjamin, logically conceived of this scenario in 1928, of communicationwith card indices rather than books: “And even today, as the current scientific methodteaches us, the book is an archaic intermediate between two different card indexsystems. For everything substantial is found in the slip box of the researcher who wroteit and the scholar who studies in it, assimilated into its own card index.” 47
- Walter Benjamin, Einbahnstra ß e, in Gesammelte Schriften, vol. 4 (Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp Verlag, 1928/1981), 98 – 140, at 103.
Does Walter Benjamin prefigure the idea of card indexes conversing with themselves in a communicative method similar to that of Vannevar Bush's Memex?
This definitely sounds like the sort of digital garden inter-communication afforded by the Anagora as suggested by @Flancian.
Dr Ellie Murray, ScD. (2021, September 19). We really need follow-up effectiveness data on the J&J one shot vaccine, but not sure what this study tells us. A short epi 101 on case-control studies & why they’re hard to interpret. 🧵/n [Tweet]. @EpiEllie. https://twitter.com/EpiEllie/status/1439587659026993152
Caulfield, T., Bubela, T., Kimmelman, J., & Ravitsky, V. (2021). Let’s do better: Public representations of COVID-19 science. FACETS, 6, 403–423. https://doi.org/10.1139/facets-2021-0018
In this way the pressures of the multitude and diversity of authorita-tive opinion, already articulated in the previous century by Peter Abelard (1079–1142), were heightened by the development of reference books, from indexes and concordances that made originalia searchable and to the large compilations that excerpted and summarized from diverse sources.
Prior to the flourishing of reference materials, Peter Abelard (1079-1142) had articulated the idea of "the multitude and diversity of authoritative opinion" to be found in available material. How was one to decide which authority to believe in a time before the scientific method?
Even if the Speculum was copied only in parts, Vincent of Beauvais exposed the reader to multiple opinions on any topic he discussed. Neither the concordance nor the encyclo-pedic compendium resolved the textual difficulties or contradictions that they helped bring to light. Vincent explicitly left to the reader the task of reaching a final conclusion amid the diversity of authoritative opinions that might exist on a question: “I am not unaware of the fact that philosophers have said many contradictory things, especially about the nature of things. . . . I warn the reader, lest he perhaps be horrified, if he finds some contradictions of this kind among the names of diverse authors in many places of this work, especially since I have acted in this work not as an author, but as an excerptor, that I did not try to reduce the sayings of the philosophers to agreement but report what each said or wrote on each thing; leaving to the judgment of the reader to decide which opinion to prefer.”161
Interesting that Vincent of Beauvais indicates that there were discrepancies between the authors, but leaves it up to the reader to decide for themself.
What would the reader do in these cases in a culture before the scientific method and the coming scientific revolutions? Does this statement prefigure the beginning of a cultural shift?
Are there other examples of (earlier) writers encouraging the the comparison of two different excerpts from "expert" or authoritative sources to determine which should have precedence?
What other methods would have encouraged this sort of behavior?
EMA. (2020, October 27). COVID-19 vaccines: Development, evaluation, approval and monitoring [Text]. European Medicines Agency. https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/human-regulatory/overview/public-health-threats/coronavirus-disease-covid-19/treatments-vaccines/vaccines-covid-19/covid-19-vaccines-development-evaluation-approval-monitoring
ReconfigBehSci on Twitter: ‘@alexdefig are you really going to claim that responses to the introduction of passports on uptake across 4 other countries are evidentially entirely irrelevant to whether or not passports are justified or not?’ / Twitter. (n.d.). Retrieved 31 March 2022, from https://twitter.com/SciBeh/status/1444358068280565764
James Heathers. (2021, October 26). Perish the thought I would be as peremptory as @GidMK. No, I’m going to hector, mock, or annoy those replies, THEN ask for money, THEN block you when I get bored. See, these aren’t rebuttals. No-one’s said anything about the actual work. Nothing. Not a sausage. [Tweet]. @jamesheathers. https://twitter.com/jamesheathers/status/1452980059497762824
Heathers, J. (2021, October 23). The Real Scandal About Ivermectin. The Atlantic. https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2021/10/ivermectin-research-problems/620473/
Contents | Science 375, 6586. (n.d.). Science. Retrieved 23 March 2022, from https://www.science.org/doi/abs/10.1126/science.2022.375.issue-6586
These ways of knowinghave inherent value and are leading Western scientists to betterunderstand celestial phenomena and the history and heritage thisconstitutes for all people.
The phrase "ways of knowing" is fascinating and seems to have a particular meaning across multiple contexts.
I'd like to collect examples of its use and come up with a more concrete definition for Western audiences.
How close is it to the idea of ways (or methods) of learning and understanding? How is it bound up in the idea of pedagogy? How does it relate to orality and memory contrasted with literacy? Though it may not subsume the idea of scientific method, the use, evolution, and refinement of these methods over time may generally equate it with the scientific method.
Could such an oral package be considered a learning management system? How might we compare and contrast these for drawing potential equivalencies of these systems to put them on more equal footing from a variety of cultural perspectives? One is not necessarily better than another, but we should be able to better appreciate what each brings to the table of world knowledge.
9/8g Hinter der Zettelkastentechnik steht dieErfahrung: Ohne zu schreiben kann mannicht denken – jedenfalls nicht in anspruchsvollen,selektiven Zugriff aufs Gedächtnis voraussehendenZusammenhängen. Das heißt auch: ohne Differenzen einzukerben,kann man nicht denken.
Google translation:
9/8g The Zettelkasten technique is based on experience: You can't think without writing—at least not in contexts that require selective access to memory.
That also means: you can't think without notching differences.
There's something interesting about the translation here of "notching" occurring on an index card about ideas which can be linked to the early computer science version of edge-notched cards. Could this have been a subtle and tangential reference to just this sort of computing?
The idea isn't new to me, but in the last phrase Luhmann tangentially highlights the value of the zettelkasten for more easily and directly comparing and contrasting the ideas on two different cards which might be either linked or juxtaposed.
Link to:
Shield of Achilles and ekphrasis thesis
https://hypothes.is/a/I-VY-HyfEeyjIC_pm7NF7Q With the further context of the full quote including "with selective access to memory" Luhmann seemed to at least to make space (if not give a tacit nod?) to oral traditions which had methods for access to memories in ways that modern literates don't typically give any credit at all. Johannes F.K .Schmidt certainly didn't and actively erased it in Niklas Luhmann’s Card Index: The Fabrication of Serendipity.
The linear process promoted by most study guides, which insanelystarts with the decision on the hypothesis or the topic to write about,is a sure-fire way to let confirmation bias run rampant.
Many study and writing guides suggest to start ones' writing or research work with a topic or hypothesis. This is a recipe for disaster to succumb to confirmation bias as one is more likely to search out for confirming evidence rather than counter arguments. Better to start with interesting topic and collect ideas from there which can be pitted against each other.
SciBeh Virtual Workshop 2021: Science Communication as Collective Intelligence. (n.d.). SciBeh. Retrieved 14 February 2022, from https://www.scibeh.org/events/workshop2021/
Smith, G. C. S., & Pell, J. P. (2003). Parachute use to prevent death and major trauma related to gravitational challenge: Systematic review of randomised controlled trials. BMJ : British Medical Journal, 327(7429), 1459–1461.
Deepti Gurdasani. (2022, January 29). Going to say this again because it’s important. Case-control studies to determine prevalence of long COVID are completely flawed science, but are often presented as being scientifically robust. This is not how we can define clinical syndromes or their prevalence! A thread. [Tweet]. @dgurdasani1. https://twitter.com/dgurdasani1/status/1487366920508694529
Deepti Gurdasani. (2022, January 30). Have tried to now visually illustrate an earlier thread I wrote about why prevalence estimates based on comparisons of “any symptom” between infected cases, and matched controls will yield underestimates for long COVID. I’ve done a toy example below here, to show this 🧵 [Tweet]. @dgurdasani1. https://twitter.com/dgurdasani1/status/1487578265187405828
Retraction Watch. (2022, January 7). Our list of retracted COVID-19 papers is up to 206. For context and denominators, please see the post. Https://retractionwatch.com/retracted-coronavirus-covid-19-papers/ [Tweet]. @RetractionWatch. https://twitter.com/RetractionWatch/status/1479599196089077766
Spinney, L. (2022, January 9). Are we witnessing the dawn of post-theory science? The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2022/jan/09/are-we-witnessing-the-dawn-of-post-theory-science
Hobbes and Rousseau told their contemporaries things that werestartling, profound and opened new doors of the imagination. Nowtheir ideas are just tired common sense. There’s nothing in them thatjustifies the continued simplification of human affairs. If socialscientists today continue to reduce past generations to simplistic,two-dimensional caricatures, it is not so much to show us anythingoriginal, but just because they feel that’s what social scientists areexpected to do so as to appear ‘scientific’. The actual result is toimpoverish history – and as a consequence, to impoverish our senseof possibility.
The simplification required to make models and study systems can be a useful tool, but one constantly needs to go back to the actual system to make sure that future predictions and work actually fit the real world system.
Too often social theorists make assumptions which aren't supported in real life and this can be a painfully dangerous practice, especially when those assumptions are built upon in ways that put those theories out on a proverbial creaking limb.
This idea is related to the bias that Charles Mathewes points out about how we treat writers as still living or as if they never lived. see: https://hypothes.is/a/VTU2lFvZEeyiJ2tN76i4sA
Loud Silenced Doctors | Science-Based Medicine. (2021, December 19). https://sciencebasedmedicine.org/muzzled/
Every serious (academic) historical work includes a conversation with other scholarship, and this has largely carried over into popular historical writing.
Any serious historical or other academic work should include a conversation with the body of other scholarship with which argues for or against.
Comparing and contrasting one idea with another is crucial for any sort of advancement.
Replicating scientific results is tough—But essential. (2021). Nature, 600(7889), 359–360. https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-021-03736-4
Tom Moultrie. (2021, December 12). Given the comedic misinterpretation of the South African testing data offered by @BallouxFrancois (and many others!) last night ... I offer some tips having contributed to the analysis of the testing data for the @nicd_sa since April last year. (1/6) [Tweet]. @tomtom_m. https://twitter.com/tomtom_m/status/1469954015932915718
Foucault proclaimed in a footnote: “ Appearance of the index card and development of the human sciences: another invention little celebrated by historians. ”
from Foucault 1975, p. 363, n. 49; see Foucault 1966, pp. XV and passim for discourse analysis.
Is he talking here about the invention of the index card about the same time as the rise of the scientific method? With index cards one can directly compare and contrast two different ideas as if weighing them on a balance to see which carries more weight. Then the better idea can win while the lesser is discarded to the "scrap heap"?
tack towards discovery, towards truth
This sailing metaphor is a useful one. Buffeted on all sides by distraction. Constantly shifting pressures, but generally going in the same direction. There maybe an ideal path forward, but the variables are too numerous to know where the ideal path lies.
@lakens: I’m interested to hear which COVID studies by psychologists you think have had a measurable positive effect on the world. E.g.… [Tweet]. https://twitter.com/lakens/status/1427856489990004741?s=20
Mateus, J., Dan, J. M., Zhang, Z., Rydyznski Moderbacher, C., Lammers, M., Goodwin, B., Sette, A., Crotty, S., & Weiskopf, D. (n.d.). Low-dose mRNA-1273 COVID-19 vaccine generates durable memory enhanced by cross-reactive T cells. Science, 0(0), eabj9853. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.abj9853
Bracher, J., Wolffram, D., Deuschel, J., Görgen, K., Ketterer, J. L., Ullrich, A., Abbott, S., Barbarossa, M. V., Bertsimas, D., Bhatia, S., Bodych, M., Bosse, N. I., Burgard, J. P., Castro, L., Fairchild, G., Fuhrmann, J., Funk, S., Gogolewski, K., Gu, Q., … Xu, F. T. (2021). A pre-registered short-term forecasting study of COVID-19 in Germany and Poland during the second wave. Nature Communications, 12(1), 5173. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-021-25207-0
Science is like competitive sports | NWO. (n.d.). Retrieved 11 August 2021, from https://www.nwo.nl/en/science-competitive-sports
McIntyre, L. (2021). Talking to science deniers and sceptics is not hopeless. Nature, 596(7871), 165–165. https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-021-02152-y
Murphy, C., Laurence, E., & Allard, A. (2021). Deep learning of contagion dynamics on complex networks. Nature Communications, 12(1), 4720. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-021-24732-2
After a long and influential career, commonplace books lost their influence in the late seventeenth century. Classical passages were relegated to the anti- quarian scholar; they no longer molded discourse and life. Men who sought confirmation in empirical evidence and scientific measurement had little use for commonplace books.
I believe that Earle Havens disputes the idea of the waning of the commonplace book after this.
I would draw issue with it as well. Perhaps it lost some ground in the classrooms of the youth, but Harvard was teaching the idea during Ralph Waldo Emerson's time during the 1800s. Then there's the rise of the Zettelkasten in Germany in the 1700s (and later officially in the 1900s).
Lichtenberg specifically mentions using his commonplace as a scientific tool for sharpening his ideas.
Can we find references to other commonplacers like Francis Bacon mentioning the use of them for science?
Nan, X., Wang, Y., & Thier, K. (2021). Health Misinformation. PsyArXiv. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/jt3ur
‘Trust the science’ is the mantra of the Covid crisis – but what about human fallibility? | Margaret Simons | The Guardian. (n.d.). Retrieved July 27, 2021, from https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/jul/24/trust-the-science-is-the-mantra-of-the-covid-crisis-but-what-about-human-fallibility?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other
Simon DeDeo and Elizabeth Hobson on equality and hierarchy | Santa Fe Institute. (n.d.). Retrieved 30 June 2021, from https://www.santafe.edu/news-center/news/simon-dedeo-and-elizabeth-hobson-equality-and-hierarchy
Soderberg, C. K., Errington, T. M., Schiavone, S. R., Bottesini, J., Thorn, F. S., Vazire, S., Esterling, K. M., & Nosek, B. A. (2021). Initial evidence of research quality of registered reports compared with the standard publishing model. Nature Human Behaviour, 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-021-01142-4
Health, A. G. D. of. (2021, March 13). COVID-19 vaccines – Is it true? [Text]. Australian Government Department of Health; Australian Government Department of Health. https://www.health.gov.au/initiatives-and-programs/covid-19-vaccines/is-it-true
Derrick, G. (2021). A year after lockdowns began, has research got any kinder? Nature. https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-021-01579-7
We just cannot know all that life will throw at us, and if we want our grading contract to be fair and equitable for everyone, we need to reexamine it, reflect on how it has been working for each of us, and perhaps adjust it.
This idea of re-evaluating at regular time points can be a very useful and powerful tool in more areas than just writing.
Society as a whole needs to look carefully at where it is do do this same sort of readjustment as well.
It's the same sort of negative feedback mechanism which is at work in the scientific method and constantly improving the state-of-the art.
Lynne Kelly's observation that oral cultures revised useful knowledge into their memories appears to me to be a simple precursor to annotation and the idea of the scientific method all in one...
Scholars are likely familiar with the so-called “Great Conversation,” or the idea in Western thought that we collectively participate in an iterative process of knowledge production through reference, review, and refinement. As our conversation continues over time, an ever-expanding network of annotation–through notation, citation, links, and data–traces an interconnected lineage of ideas and insight.
Again, Dr. Lynne Kelly discusses this sort of process in non-Western and primarily oral cultures as well. Songlines has some interesting discussion of this in the Australian aboriginal cultures.
Data Collection and Integration to Enhance Public Health Registration, Thu, Jun 10, 2021 at 1:00 PM | Eventbrite. (n.d.). Retrieved May 28, 2021, from https://www.eventbrite.com/e/data-collection-and-integration-to-enhance-public-health-registration-156146370999
Long before Vannevar Bush, Francis Bacon cited Seneca to describe a similar ambition for his scientific method, which he hoped would “abridge the infinity of individual experience ... and remedy the complaint of vita brevis, ars longa.”
Blair’s previous work demonstrated that the practices of literary reading and writing were central to the rise of scientific method. Focusing on the lawyer and scientist Jean Bodin in the sixteenth century, she meticulously examined how Bodin collected commonplace reading notes and then stored and analyzed them as scientific evidence.
I really do need to create a historical timeline for commonplace books already.
Georg Christoph Lichtenberg also did this in the late 1700's and became famous for it after his death and the publication of his Waste Books. Worth looking into who his influences may have been?
Cringing at your own memories does no one any good. On the other hand, systematically reviewing your older work to find the patterns in where you got it wrong (and right!) is hugely beneficial — it’s a useful process of introspection that makes it easier to spot and avoid your own pitfalls.
This idea is far from new and is roughly what Georg Christoph Lichtenberg was doing with the science portions of his Waste Books in the late 1700's where he was running experiments, noting wins, losses, and making progress using the scientific method.
The ‘Learning Bayesian Statistics’ podcast. (n.d.). Retrieved 13 May 2021, from https://www.learnbayesstats.com
The scrapbooks reveal a critical and analytical way of thinking and emphasis on experimental evidence in physics, through which he became one of the early founders and advocates of modern scientific methodology. The more experience and experiments are accumulated during the exploration of nature, the more faltering its theories become. It is always good though not to abandon them instantly. For every hypothesis which used to be good at least serves the purpose of duly summarizing and keeping all phenomena until its own time. One should lay down the conflicting experience separately, until it has accumulated sufficiently to justify the efforts necessary to edifice a new theory. (Lichtenberg: scrapbook JII/1602)
Georg Christoph Lichtenberg used his notebooks as thinking tools with respect to scientific methodology.
Epidemiology 101 for Journalists. (n.d.). Epidemiology, Biostatistics and Occupational Health. Retrieved 23 February 2021, from https://www.mcgill.ca/epi-biostat-occh/epidemiology-101-journalists
Ten scientific reasons in support of airborne transmission of SARS-CoV-2—The Lancet. (n.d.). Retrieved April 19, 2021, from https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(21)00869-2/fulltext
Białek, M., & Grossmann, I. (2021). Social bias insights concern judgments rather than real-world decisions. PsyArXiv. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/y3h7n
West, J. D., & Bergstrom, C. T. (2021). Misinformation in and about science. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 118(15). https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1912444117
‘bold’ means to have many observational consequences
As I said at the wiki I saw this link from, you don't test the hypothesis directly, you test the predictions, the "observational consequences", from the hypothesis.
Maarten van Smeden. (2021, March 25). 🚨🚨NEW EVIDENCE PYRAMID🚨🚨 https://t.co/RnGfl337tD [Tweet]. @MaartenvSmeden. https://twitter.com/MaartenvSmeden/status/1375008127737851904
Breznau, N., Rinke, E. M., Wuttke, A., Adem, M., Adriaans, J., Alvarez-Benjumea, A., Andersen, H. K., Auer, D., Azevedo, F., Bahnsen, O., Balzer, D., Bauer, G., Bauer, P. C., Baumann, M., Baute, S., Benoit, V., Bernauer, J., Berning, C., Berthold, A., … Nguyen, H. H. V. (2021). Observing Many Researchers using the Same Data and Hypothesis Reveals a Hidden Universe of Data Analysis. MetaArXiv. https://doi.org/10.31222/osf.io/cd5j9
Machine learning models for diagnosing COVID-19 are not yet suitable for clinical use. (2021, March 15). University of Cambridge. https://www.cam.ac.uk/research/news/machine-learning-models-for-diagnosing-covid-19-are-not-yet-suitable-for-clinical-use
Coenen, A., & Gureckis, T. (2021). The distorting effects of deciding to stop sampling information. PsyArXiv. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/tbrea
Bergot, N. (2020, October 24). Battling fake science: University of Alberta launches free online science literacy course. Edmonton Journal. https://edmontonjournal.com/news/local-news/battling-fake-science-ualberta-launches-free-online-science-literacy-course
Collabovid. (n.d.). Retrieved 6 March 2021, from https://www.collabovid.org/
PRINCIPIA - Decentralized peer review. (n.d.). Retrieved 5 March 2021, from http://www.principia.network/
PhD, D. D. (n.d.). Managing scientific discourse on Twitter. Retrieved 5 March 2021, from https://statsepi.substack.com/p/managing-scientific-discourse-on
Cailin O’Connor. (2020, November 10). New paper!!! @psmaldino look at what causes the persistence of poor methods in science, even when better methods are available. And we argue that interdisciplinary contact can lead better methods to spread. 1 https://t.co/C5beJA5gMi [Tweet]. @cailinmeister. https://twitter.com/cailinmeister/status/1326221893372833793
Market, R. T. (n.d.). Build trust through criticism. Red Team Market. Retrieved 4 March 2021, from https://redteammarket.com/
Pennycook, Gordon. ‘How the COVID-19 Crisis Exposes Widespread Climate Change Hypocrisy’. CBC, 22 May 2020. https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/saskatchewan/opinion-climate-change-should-believe-dont-understand-1.5482416.
Oreskes, N. (2019). Systematicity is necessary but not sufficient: On the problem of facsimile science. Synthese, 196(3), 881–905. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-017-1481-1
A scientist who does not utilize the scientific method is as much use as a carpenter who cannot make chairs or a plumber who cannot fix toilets. A science that exists as a fixed absolute, whose premises are not to be questioned, whose data is not to be examined and whose conclusions are not to be debated, is a pile of wood or a leaky toilet. Not the conclusion of a process, but its absence.
Understanding science is a process.
Open Science Community Tilburg on Twitter. (n.d.). Twitter. Retrieved October 28, 2020, from https://twitter.com/OpenTilburg/status/1318518990000607234
Brañas-Garza, P., Jorrat, D., Espín, A. M., & Sánchez, A. (2020). Paid and hypothetical time preferences are the same: Lab, field and online evidence. ArXiv:2010.09262 [Physics]. http://arxiv.org/abs/2010.09262
Science as Amateur Software Development. (2020, September 26). https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zwRdO9_GGhY&feature=youtu.be
Krumsvik, R. J. (2020). Extended Editorial. Nordic Journal of Digital Literacy, 15(03), 141–152. https://doi.org/10.18261/issn.1891-943x-2020-03-01
Weber notes that according to any economic theory that posited man as a rational profit-maximizer, raising the piece-work rate should increase labor productivity. But in fact, in many traditional peasant communities, raising the piece-work rate actually had the opposite effect of lowering labor productivity: at the higher rate, a peasant accustomed to earning two and one-half marks per day found he could earn the same amount by working less, and did so because he valued leisure more than income. The choices of leisure over income, or of the militaristic life of the Spartan hoplite over the wealth of the Athenian trader, or even the ascetic life of the early capitalist entrepreneur over that of a traditional leisured aristocrat, cannot possibly be explained by the impersonal working of material forces,
Science could learn something from this. Science is too far focused on the idealized positive outcomes that it isn't paying attention to the negative outcomes and using that to better define its outline or overall shape. We need to define a scientific opportunity cost and apply it to the negative side of research to better understand and define what we're searching for.
Of course, how can we define a new scientific method (or amend/extend it) to better take into account negative results--particularly in an age when so many results aren't even reproducible?
Nagaraj, A., Shears, E., & Vaan, M. de. (2020). Improving data access democratizes and diversifies science. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 117(38), 23490–23498. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2001682117
Susan Athey, July 22, 2020. (2020, August 2). https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hqTOPrUxDzM
Kasy, M. (2020). How to run an adaptive field experiment. Retrieved from https://maxkasy.github.io/home/files/slides/adaptive_field_slides_kasy.pdf
r/BehSciMeta - Comment by u/VictorVenema on ”Can one distinguish between argument and fact? And, if yes, how?”. (n.d.). Reddit. Retrieved July 10, 2020, from https://www.reddit.com/r/BehSciMeta/comments/ho0qr1/can_one_distinguish_between_argument_and_fact_and/fxezalm
van Smeden, M., Lash, T. L., & Groenwold, R. H. H. (2020). Reflection on modern methods: Five myths about measurement error in epidemiological research. International Journal of Epidemiology, 49(1), 338–347. https://doi.org/10.1093/ije/dyz251
Laghaie, A., & Otter, T. (2020). Measuring evidence for mediation in the presence of measurement error [Preprint]. PsyArXiv. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/5bz3f
Parikh, D. (2020, May 27). How we write rebuttals. Medium. https://medium.com/@deviparikh/how-we-write-rebuttals-dc84742fece1
van Rooij, I., & Baggio, G. (2020). Theory development requires an epistemological sea change [Preprint]. PsyArXiv. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/rnw9q
Travis Whitfill MPH on Twitter: “A quick visual aid of major studies & levels of evidence against #hydroxychloroquine for the use in COVID-19 patients. No robust studies have found any type of benefit for HCQ. https://t.co/YbSjvaoEoO” / Twitter. (n.d.). Twitter. Retrieved August 2, 2020, from https://twitter.com/twhitfill/status/1288825416975708161
Fuhrer, J., & Cova, F. (2020). “Quick and dirty”: Intuitive cognitive style predicts trust in Didier Raoult and his hydroxychloroquine-based treatment against COVID-19. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/ju62p
Sperrin, M., Martin, G. P., Sisk, R., & Peek, N. (2020). Missing data should be handled differently for prediction than for description or causal explanation. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 0(0). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2020.03.028
Olsson-Collentine, A., van Assen, M. A. L. M., & Wicherts, J. M. (2020). Postprint—Heterogeneity in direct replications in psychology and its association with effect size [Preprint]. PsyArXiv. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/m23v4
Mis-allocated scrutiny. (2020, June 24). The 100% CI. http://www.the100.ci/2020/06/24/mis-allocated-scrutiny/
Efron, B. (2020). Prediction, Estimation, and Attribution. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 115(530), 636–655. https://doi.org/10.1080/01621459.2020.1762613
Muthukrishna, M., Bell, A. V., Henrich, J., Curtin, C. M., Gedranovich, A., McInerney, J., & Thue, B. (2020). Beyond Western, Educated, Industrial, Rich, and Democratic (WEIRD) Psychology: Measuring and Mapping Scales of Cultural and Psychological Distance: Psychological Science. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797620916782
Rosenbusch, H., Hilbert, L. P., Evans, A. M., & Zeelenberg, M. (2020). StatBreak: Identifying “Lucky” Data Points Through Genetic Algorithms. Advances in Methods and Practices in Psychological Science, 2515245920917950. https://doi.org/10.1177/2515245920917950
I buy into Newton’s philosophy that we see further by standing on the shoulders of giants.
I take his general point here, and Newton said something along these lines, but I wouldn't call it "Newton's philosophy". If anything this philosophy is really the scientific method and Newton didn't invent it.
mechanistic approach
"ars est celare artem: art consists in concealing art"
I do not dig this mechanical, technical, scientific method dissection of writing. Unfortunately, this article is filled with this pre-Freudian crap. You wouldn't tear Raphael a new one because he painted The School of Athens figures in the wrong order.
Are these mechanics the result of the scientific method?
The point of replication isn't to shame researchers — it's to build better science
Performance CategoryDesign Categoriesi. StructureFrame design, shape and materials –for functionii. MobilityThrusters: number, power, orientationiii. SensorsCameras, lights, sonar, touch sensors, compass, GPSiv. ToolsArms, claws, rakes, wrenches, hammersv. Ranging DistanceTether length: waterproofing required vi. Buoyancy/ BallastFixed or variable, location and materialsvii. ControlsRC via wire or signal via fibre optic cableviii. Other?Depends on the specific mission
Are you doing science projects? Maybe you can use an old mission scope to have students ask questions about. That way some of the questions we will need to face will be answered before we actually get the mission for this year.
Is he saying something about inductive vs deductive methods? Where typically historians have a model or a hypothesis but now they are allowing the data to tell the story?