Joël Léonard
LightNews LightNews
banner
leojdranoel.bsky.social
Joël Léonard
@leojdranoel.bsky.social
82 followers 89 following 110 posts
Love books 📚, running, cycling, photography 📷, philosophy & 🍫, fan du 1 hebdo et de Montaigne.
Chercheur à INRAE BioEcoAgro (soils, GHG, N2O, environmental modelling).
Posts Replies Media Videos
Pinned
leojdranoel.bsky.social
Joël Léonard @leojdranoel.bsky.social · Nov 23
Leçon d'optimisme.
Reposted by Joël Léonard
manlius.bsky.social
"In other words, European taxpayers will have spent more on the funding process than on the funding itself, and the scientific ecosystem has been drained"

The situation is rapidly becoming unsustainable: the current research funding scheme does not work.

www.nature.com/articles/d41...
Point of no returns: researchers are crossing a threshold in the fight for funding
With so little money to go round, the costs of competing for grants can exceed what the grants are worth. When that happens, nobody wins.
www.nature.com
January 28, 2026 at 12:59 PM
Reposted by Joël Léonard
inrae-hdf.bsky.social
🌿 Une plante qui protège les sols et l’eau ?
Le #miscanthus ne sert pas qu’à produire de la biomasse : des chercheurs d’ #INRAE montrent qu’il peut aussi aider à mieux gérer l’azote, réduire les #nitrates et rendre l’ #agriculture plus durable 🌍
👉 www.inrae.fr/actualites/g...
Gestion de l’azote par la culture de Miscanthus sinensis : vers de nouveaux services écosystémiques
Pour viser un service écosystémique de régulation de l’eau autour des points de captage afin de préserver la qualité de l’eau distribuée aux habitants, l’idée est de rechercher des génotypes absorbant beaucoup d’azote pour extraire les nitrates en excès dans le sol. Pour viser un autre service dit de soutien, une autre possibilité est de trouver des génotypes recyclant au mieux l’azote. Existe-t-il des variations entre génotypes qui permettraient plus ou moins d’absorber ou de recycler l’azote ?
www.inrae.fr
January 28, 2026 at 9:55 AM
Reposted by Joël Léonard
barackobama.bsky.social
The killing of Alex Pretti is a heartbreaking tragedy. It should also be a wake-up call to every American, regardless of party, that many of our core values as a nation are increasingly under assault.
January 25, 2026 at 5:39 PM
Reposted by Joël Léonard
astropierre.com
On parle souvent des conséquences catastrophiques de la politique sanitaire du gouvernement Trump, portée par son secrétaire à la santé complotiste et antivax Robert Kennedy Jr., à la fois aux US, mais aussi dans le reste du monde.

En voici un exemple terrifiant.

Thread à dérouler ci-dessous

1/16
Robert Kennedy Jr et Donald Trump montrant un document signé
January 8, 2026 at 5:43 PM
leojdranoel.bsky.social
Comme souvent, un excellent billet sur les conséquences de passer d'une économie de la valeur à une économie du signal, y compris dans le monde académique. Difficile de ne pas partager le constat.
January 1, 2026 at 12:56 PM
Reposted by Joël Léonard
benpatrickwill.bsky.social
Closing out my year with a journal editor shocker 🧵

Checking new manuscripts today I reviewed a paper attributing 2 papers to me I did not write. A daft thing for an author to do of course. But intrigued I web searched up one of the titles and that's when it got real weird...
December 19, 2025 at 5:20 PM
leojdranoel.bsky.social
Un billet très intéressant sur le Japon et plus généralement le lien croissance et bon fonctionnement social !
December 12, 2025 at 7:14 AM
leojdranoel.bsky.social
It's fun how some statements, such as "we believe", span over a particularly wide range of assigned probability!
adamjkucharski.bsky.social Adam Kucharski @adamjkucharski.bsky.social · Dec 8
How do large language models interpret words relating to probability like “unlikely,” “probably,” or “almost certain"?

The below shows what happens when we compare judgements from different models to a benchmark dataset of human judgments (data from: github.com/zonination/p...).
December 8, 2025 at 7:26 PM
Reposted by Joël Léonard
cnrs.fr
From January 1st 2026, the CNRS will cut access to one of the largest commercial bibliometric databases, Clarivate Analytics' Web of Science, along with the Core Collection and Journal Citation Reports.
The CNRS is breaking free from the Web of Science
From January 1st 2026, the CNRS will cut access to one of the largest commercial bibliometric databases, Clarivate Analytics'
www.cnrs.fr
December 1, 2025 at 11:04 AM
Reposted by Joël Léonard
hansonmark.bsky.social
We wrote the Strain on scientific publishing to highlight the problems of time & trust. With a fantastic group of co-authors, we present The Drain of Scientific Publishing:

a 🧵 1/n

Drain: arxiv.org/abs/2511.04820
Strain: direct.mit.edu/qss/article/...
Oligopoly: direct.mit.edu/qss/article/...
A table showing profit margins of major publishers. A snippet of text related to this table is below. 1. The four-fold drain 1.1 Money Currently, academic publishing is dominated by profit-oriented, multinational companies for whom scientific knowledge is a commodity to be sold back to the academic community who created it. The dominant four are Elsevier, Springer Nature, Wiley and Taylor & Francis, which collectively generated over US$7.1 billion in revenue from journal publishing in 2024 alone, and over US$12 billion in profits between 2019 and 2024 (Table 1A). Their profit margins have always been over 30% in the last five years, and for the largest publisher (Elsevier) always over 37%. Against many comparators, across many sectors, scientific publishing is one of the most consistently profitable industries (Table S1). These financial arrangements make a substantial difference to science budgets. In 2024, 46% of Elsevier revenues and 53% of Taylor & Francis revenues were generated in North America, meaning that North American researchers were charged over US$2.27 billion by just two for-profit publishers. The Canadian research councils and the US National Science Foundation were allocated US$9.3 billion in that year. A figure detailing the drain on researcher time. 1. The four-fold drain 1.2 Time The number of papers published each year is growing faster than the scientific workforce, with the number of papers per researcher almost doubling between 1996 and 2022 (Figure 1A). This reflects the fact that publishers’ commercial desire to publish (sell) more material has aligned well with the competitive prestige culture in which publications help secure jobs, grants, promotions, and awards. To the extent that this growth is driven by a pressure for profit, rather than scholarly imperatives, it distorts the way researchers spend their time. The publishing system depends on unpaid reviewer labour, estimated to be over 130 million unpaid hours annually in 2020 alone (9). Researchers have complained about the demands of peer-review for decades, but the scale of the problem is now worse, with editors reporting widespread difficulties recruiting reviewers. The growth in publications involves not only the authors’ time, but that of academic editors and reviewers who are dealing with so many review demands. Even more seriously, the imperative to produce ever more articles reshapes the nature of scientific inquiry. Evidence across multiple fields shows that more papers result in ‘ossification’, not new ideas (10). It may seem paradoxical that more papers can slow progress until one considers how it affects researchers’ time. While rewards remain tied to volume, prestige, and impact of publications, researchers will be nudged away from riskier, local, interdisciplinary, and long-term work. The result is a treadmill of constant activity with limited progress whereas core scholarly practices – such as reading, reflecting and engaging with others’ contributions – is de-prioritized. What looks like productivity often masks intellectual exhaustion built on a demoralizing, narrowing scientific vision. A table of profit margins across industries. The section of text related to this table is below: 1. The four-fold drain 1.1 Money Currently, academic publishing is dominated by profit-oriented, multinational companies for whom scientific knowledge is a commodity to be sold back to the academic community who created it. The dominant four are Elsevier, Springer Nature, Wiley and Taylor & Francis, which collectively generated over US$7.1 billion in revenue from journal publishing in 2024 alone, and over US$12 billion in profits between 2019 and 2024 (Table 1A). Their profit margins have always been over 30% in the last five years, and for the largest publisher (Elsevier) always over 37%. Against many comparators, across many sectors, scientific publishing is one of the most consistently profitable industries (Table S1). These financial arrangements make a substantial difference to science budgets. In 2024, 46% of Elsevier revenues and 53% of Taylor & Francis revenues were generated in North America, meaning that North American researchers were charged over US$2.27 billion by just two for-profit publishers. The Canadian research councils and the US National Science Foundation were allocated US$9.3 billion in that year. The costs of inaction are plain: wasted public funds, lost researcher time, compromised scientific integrity and eroded public trust. Today, the system rewards commercial publishers first, and science second. Without bold action from the funders we risk continuing to pour resources into a system that prioritizes profit over the advancement of scientific knowledge.
November 11, 2025 at 11:52 AM
leojdranoel.bsky.social
Comme je l'ai lu récemment je ne sais plus où, le conseil (excellent) qu'on pourrait donner à Laurent Alexandre pour paraphraser son torchon est : N'écrivez plus de livres (par pitié...).
ferrydanini.bsky.social Dr Juliette @ferrydanini.bsky.social · Nov 1
"rendre nos enfants complémentaires de l'IA" quelle perspective réjouissante
samuelgontier.bsky.social Samuel Gontier @samuelgontier.bsky.social · Oct 31
Je vous ai épargné Laurent Alexandre avec Nathalie Saint-Cricq et Gilles Bornstein.
“Le rythme de l’université est trop lent, elle forme nos enfants à des méthodes et à des savoir-faire qui étaient bons il y a 30 ans. On n’a pas réfléchi à la façon de rendre nos enfants complémentaires de l’IA.”
November 1, 2025 at 5:32 PM
Reposted by Joël Léonard
ewcss.info
I'm not surprised to find this in my e-mail inbox, but I am enraged. Springer Nature is now offering "AI" to "help" you "quickly understand any paper" and edit your manuscripts.

Publishers should be pushing back against "AI" to protect scientific integrity and author's rights. (1/2)
⚗️🧪 #AcademicSky
A screen-capture from an e-mail. The header reads "nature research assistant", and the body reads: Save time with a tool you can trust Your new AI-powered research assistant Dear Evan Spotte-Smith, Welcome to Nature Research Assistant–Springer Nature’s brand-new tool to help you read faster, contextualise insights and improve the communication of your research. You have been exclusively selected to access the all-new Nature Research Assistant. It is currently in beta and immediate access is only available with an invitation. To get started, login using your email address (ewcspottesmith@cmu.edu). If you do not already have a Springer Nature account, we ask that you create one by following the registration steps on the login page. The text of the body is white. Behind it is a black background with an array of red dots, some of them seemingly connected by red lines. Perhaps a depiction of a network of some kind?
October 24, 2025 at 8:22 AM
Reposted by Joël Léonard
freakonometrics.bsky.social
Kaamran Hafeez, kaamranhafeez.com/product/i-do...
“I don’t get it. We had all those meetings”
October 20, 2025 at 10:34 PM
leojdranoel.bsky.social
C'est assez hallucinant en effet. L'analogie avec la vente d'armes est bien trouvée. Quand même, intégrer une couche permettant d'agir directement via le navigateur tout en disant "c'est un outil, ne l'utilisez pas pour tricher" c'est fort...
ferrydanini.bsky.social Dr Juliette @ferrydanini.bsky.social · Oct 14
Lol "n'utilisez pas mon grille pain pour toaster du pain"
pcouzon.bsky.social 🐾 Philippe 👣 Ⓥ @pcouzon.bsky.social · Oct 14
Le patron de Perplexity ne veut pas que les étudiants utilisent l’IA pour tricher.
October 14, 2025 at 9:42 AM
Reposted by Joël Léonard
baptistelab.bsky.social
Ce graphique 👌
peterbrannen.bsky.social Peter Brannen @peterbrannen.bsky.social · Oct 9
Just remembered this jaw-dropping graph by @oceansclimatecu.bsky.social showing the rate of change in CO2 during the previous two deglaciations of the Pleistocene (which, as a fun aside, featured ~400 feet of sea level rise) as compared with today
October 9, 2025 at 7:28 AM
leojdranoel.bsky.social
Agree! Lot of key issues in such a short format! 👍
October 9, 2025 at 11:53 AM
Reposted by Joël Léonard
julfosse.bsky.social
En cette période troublée, je recommande la lecture de "Monsieur le Ministre", de Binet. De quoi analyser la situation politique actuelle bien plus sûrement qu'en écoutant les politistes des chaînes infos...
October 6, 2025 at 3:59 PM
Reposted by Joël Léonard
nainportekoi.bsky.social
Nous sommes dimanche soir, une nouvelle semaine va bientôt commencer. Et je crois qu'il n'y a pas de meilleure manière de l'entamer que d'écouter ce formidable message que Jane Goodall a enregistré pour chacun d'entre nous.
October 5, 2025 at 8:41 PM
Reposted by Joël Léonard
remicardinael.bsky.social
Can soil-crop models mostly tested in temperate conditions be relevant under tropical conditions to simulate long-term #soilorganiccarbon #yields? A study based on 4 trials in Kenya 🇰🇪 @mcorbeels.bsky.social @gatienfalconnier.bsky.social @johansix.bsky.social

authors.elsevier.com/sd/article/S...
October 3, 2025 at 8:57 AM
Reposted by Joël Léonard
inrae-hdf.bsky.social
Cet après-midi, nous avons accueilli la commission IRD Innovation – Recherche – Développement des Chambres d'agriculture Hauts de France sur notre site #INRAE #EstréesMons : Présentation d'INRAE Hauts-de-France et d' Agro-Transfert RT, génétique du #miscanthus, observatoire, résultats #Ecophyto.
September 24, 2025 at 3:12 PM
Reposted by Joël Léonard
cnrseditions.bsky.social
Comment construire une vérité scientifique ?
@ericlagadec.bsky.social répond aux questions d'Emma Flacard dans @le1hebdo.bsky.social ✨
September 10, 2025 at 3:30 PM
leojdranoel.bsky.social
Worth reading! Thank you for sharing!
benbondlamberty.bsky.social Ben Bond-Lamberty @benbondlamberty.bsky.social · Dec 12
Scientists are expected to do peer reviewing but no one tells you HOW. After talking with several folks about this today at #AGU24 , it seems a good time to link to this presentation I made several years ago -- feel free to use/share! docs.google.com/presentation...
Effective, efficient, and fair peer reviewing 2023
Effective, efficient, and fair peer reviewing Ben Bond-Lamberty Based on a presentation at the AGU Early Career Scientist Workshop, 2019 1
docs.google.com
September 16, 2025 at 10:52 AM
Reposted by Joël Léonard
peercommunityin.bsky.social
PCI is featured in this Nature News post, which presents some ideas to help fix the peer-review system: www.nature.com/articles/d41...
The peer-review crisis: how to fix an overloaded system
Journals and funders are trying to boost the speed and effectiveness of review processes that are under strain.
www.nature.com
September 16, 2025 at 8:44 AM
Reposted by Joël Léonard
paulekruger.bsky.social
Some very valuable insights here #chemsky

"I thought science hinged on prestige. Moving abroad made me reassess my priorities" | Science | AAAS www.science.org/content/arti...
I thought science hinged on prestige. Moving abroad made me reassess my priorities
In Denmark, this Ph.D. student fell in love with an egalitarian society that values work-life balance
www.science.org
September 11, 2025 at 8:42 PM
leojdranoel.bsky.social
Totally agree! And beside the difficulty of publishing, such null or neutral results are sometimes difficult to manage by students, while they can be rock solid or great for consolidating our knowledge.
ecologistgreen.bsky.social David Green, PhD @ecologistgreen.bsky.social · Sep 11
Null results matter, but too often, they never see the light of day.

When journals only publish splashy findings, we lose valuable science.

That's why I'm excited about 2-pagers at @StacksJournal.bsky.social. Streamlined publishing for results that deserve to be shared.

🧪 #SciPub #AcademicSky
Researchers value null results, but struggle to publish them
Survey finds that fear of reputational harm and a lack of support and publication platforms are among respondents’ key concerns.
www.nature.com
September 11, 2025 at 2:11 PM