David Pascall
@davidandthebees.bsky.social
Statistician, allegedly. Evolutionary biologist, actually. Noted shoebill fan.
Reposted by David Pascall
This is a super comprehensive ‘many analysts’ paper on two different datasets
This Registered Report masterpiece just dropped at BMC Biology, brilliantly led by a great team with the help of 300+ analysts & reviewers
Same question, same data: go figure!
tl;dr: Substantial heterogeneity among results comes from differences among analytical choices
🔗 doi.org/10.1186/s129...
Same question, same data: go figure!
tl;dr: Substantial heterogeneity among results comes from differences among analytical choices
🔗 doi.org/10.1186/s129...
February 7, 2025 at 6:02 AM
This is a super comprehensive ‘many analysts’ paper on two different datasets
What are people’s thoughts about AI generated text in manuscripts? I’m reviewing a paper where it appears that large chunks of text in the intro are direct unedited copies from ChatGPT (given the word usage, etc). It’s not saying anything incorrect, should I just ignore it in the review?
January 28, 2025 at 2:53 PM
What are people’s thoughts about AI generated text in manuscripts? I’m reviewing a paper where it appears that large chunks of text in the intro are direct unedited copies from ChatGPT (given the word usage, etc). It’s not saying anything incorrect, should I just ignore it in the review?