Yes, I would not be surprised if 90% of the applications they get are in the top 1%ile, which is why i am curious on whether they ultimately pay any attention to this.

That's what the validation would be for. Being a tool from scientists for scientists it's a bit weird that we have to rely on anecdotal experience on our own manuscripts. Out of curiosity, I have also run the CRISPR 2012 paper (the one that won the Nobel) and it found 6 unsupported claims

It'd be useful to see this validated, if not independently at least by its own authors. I've tried it on my latest preprint and it suggested EEG in flies. I wonder: do papers exist that would satisfy this system, or will it always be acting as hyperzealous student at their 1st reviewing exercise?

I should have added to the acknowledgements: no puppies were harmed during the writing of this manuscript.

Big protest at Place de la République in Paris against Israel’s seizure of the Global Sumud Flotilla.

Colombia has expelled the Israeli diplomatic delegation after the Gaza flotilla interception.

I am not even sure why I had an account to be honest. Just deleted it though. Thanks.

He was pretty much an official political actor last year this time. He is isolated now and certainly does not have the same protection he had before.

In a few months, he went from a landslide to be 10+ points behind the worst party and leaders this country has ever seen; he has managed to alienate 2/3 of his voters with misplaced right wing rhetoric; he is having one resignation a week. May is actually way too late for him to go.