_Disclaimer: This has been amended from the print edition. Gerry McCormac’s pay is £438,000 including pension contributions and £414,000 without. His pay increase over two years was £119,000._ University of Stirling students are fearing the impact of the recent voluntary severance scheme which has seen 175 staff members leave the institution. 112 professional services staff and 63 academics were granted the severance package. The university said the scheme was launched to support their “financial stability” as the higher education sector continues to experience uncertainty. However, in the financial accounts dated 2023-2024, the University recorded 5.6 per cent total income growth, turning over £179.2 million with a surplus of almost £7 million. Vice Chancellor Gerry McCormac’s salary also increased again, growing to £414,000 or £438,000, including pension contributions. In the past two years, his salary has increased by £119,000. This makes him Scotland’s best-paid higher education chief. Students at the University of Stirling say they find the situation concerning. Ali, a mature Journalism Studies student, said: “There is so much anxiety amongst students about the severance scheme. “Modules are being cancelled, people are losing project or dissertation supervisors, it’s really stressful. “On top of that, the staff that are left are seeing their workloads increase massively, it hardly seems fair. “When you look at the numbers, Greedy Gerry could pay the salary of 5-6 academic staff or 10-12 professional services staff and still be left earning £100,000 per year, an amount that most of us can’t even aspire to. “It’s disgusting.” Three French lecturers, including the programme director, are leaving the university leaving students concerned about future modules. One French student said: “The whole department will be reorganised and we are losing probably some of the greatest teachers that I’ve met during my entire education. “The fact that they can’t see out the semester, and are having to leave before our assignments are due to be submitted, has given my class a lack of faith in the university, that they would decide something that does affect our education. “I think a lot of people are frustrated… there has been no acknowledgement of the fact that it will be affecting us and our education. “It is also sad to see these teachers, who have been at the uni for such a long time, upset at the fact they can’t speak to us and are being put in this position, where they can’t see out the rest of the semester at least.” Two Journalism Studies lecturers are also leaving. Students in their final year have expressed worries about their final project, as supervisors are allegedly moving from having two or three students each to seven or eight. A 21-year-old second year student, who wishes to remain anonymous, said she is worried about the changes, and worried about who is left to support them: “It is quite unnerving to be honest. “We have no clue what this means for students further on. How are lecturers going to maintain the same quality of teaching with less staff? “I am also a bit concerned about other services the university provides, such as counselling. “It all feels very unclear, which doesn’t help when uni is stressful already.” A UCU spokesperson said: “Staff are very concerned about the impacts the recently closed voluntary severance scheme is going to have on the student experience this year. “A recent survey of UCU Stirling members revealed widespread concerns about workload, including how this will impact on teaching (66 per cent think there will be significant impacts, 19 per cent some impacts, a further 13 per cent are unsure/too early to say).” One member of staff commented: “I have never seen colleagues so de-moralised. The ‘business as usual’ message is misleading. Students are already recognising that staff are struggling. We have seen no leadership. “The constant uncertainty is having a huge impact on morale as is the loss of key academic and professional services staff.” The Students’ Union Officers said: “We understand why the university has resorted to this scheme and we are in constant and regular communication with the Trade Unions on campus to ensure that staff are being treated fairly. “Whilst the university assures us that this will not have an impact on staff workload, teaching staff have raised concerns of increased workload due to this scheme and limited resources. “We want to assure our students that we are working hard to ensure that there is as little disruption to your studies as possible. “We do ask you to demonstrate understanding and kindness towards staff during this period. “Please do not hesitate to seek support if you need it either from us or Student Support Services.” A University of Stirling spokesperson said: “The University’s Voluntary Severance Scheme was one of several strategic measures designed to support long-term financial sustainability. “In an increasingly challenging and unpredictable external environment – where income generation and cost pressures are continuing to impact the entire UK higher education sector – strong financial stewardship and good governance remain essential. “The Scheme attracted significant interest, and applicants have now received their outcomes. “The savings achieved – through this Scheme and wider organisational efficiencies – are intended to support our strategic priorities and improve operational effectiveness.” _Featured image credit: University of Stirling_ __ ##### Alex Paterson + postsBio Editor-in-Chief. Twitter/X and BlueSky: @AlexPaterson01 * Alex Paterson https://brignews.com/author/alexpaterson01/ __LIVE: Rachel Reeves outlines tax and other changes in 2025 budget * Alex Paterson https://brignews.com/author/alexpaterson01/ __Stirling club pays lucky winner’s full year rent in unique giveaway * Alex Paterson https://brignews.com/author/alexpaterson01/ __Stirling Uni Student saves life with first aid * Alex Paterson https://brignews.com/author/alexpaterson01/ __Support offered after student found dead in University of Stirling accommodation * Click to share on X (Opens in new window) X * Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window) Facebook * Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window) LinkedIn * Click to email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email * Click to share on Reddit (Opens in new window) Reddit * Click to share on Tumblr (Opens in new window) Tumblr * Click to share on Pinterest (Opens in new window) Pinterest * Click to share on WhatsApp (Opens in new window) WhatsApp * ### Like this: Like Loading... ### _Related_

From publishing falsehoods to pushing far-right ideology, Grokipedia gives chatroom comments equal status to research

_The text explains that uncertainty is a fundamental part of scientific writing, yet difficult to detect automatically. The new system “UnScientify”, developed by researchers from France and Germany, uses transparent, rule-based methods to identify and categorize different forms of scientific uncertainty. It even distinguishes whether the uncertainty is expressed by the authors themselves or by others. In benchmark tests, UnScientify outperformed advanced AI models like GPT-4 in both accuracy and explainability. The tool aims to help science and society better identify uncertainty within research texts, promoting greater transparency and more effective knowledge transfer._ _Der Text beschreibt, wie Unsicherheit ein integraler Bestandteil wissenschaftlicher Texte ist und bisher schwer automatisch erfasst werden konnte. Das neue System “UnScientify”, entwickelt von Forschern in Frankreich und Deutschland, erkennt und kategorisiert verschiedene Ausdrucksformen wissenschaftlicher Unsicherheit durch regelbasierte, transparente Methoden. Es unterscheidet dabei sogar, wer die Unsicherheit äußert – die Autoren selbst oder andere Forschende. In Vergleichstests schlägt UnScientify fortschrittliche KI-Modelle wie GPT-4 in der Zuverlässigkeit und Nachvollziehbarkeit seiner Ergebnisse. Das System soll Wissenschaft und Gesellschaft helfen, Unsicherheiten in Forschungstexten besser zu erkennen, was zu mehr Transparenz und besserem Wissenstransfer führt._ DOI: 10.34879/gesisblog.2025.106 * * * ### The Hidden Patterns of Doubt – And Why They Drive Real Progress Open an academic journal, and you’ll find more than facts and figures. There are also subtle pauses, careful “maybes,” even blunt admissions of ignorance—woven seamlessly into the text. In science, uncertainty is not a weakness; it’s a driving force. Yet until recently, the art of tracing and understanding these signals of doubt remained impossible for machines—and tricky even for humans. Now, researchers at the Université Marie et Louis Pasteur in France and GESIS – Leibniz Institute for the Social Sciences in Germany are changing that, putting uncertainty itself under the microscope. ### Setting the Scene: Reading between the lines of scientific uncertainty Picture a university café on a rainy afternoon. Groups of scholars argue animatedly over results and methods, forever balancing certainty and speculation. Their articles reflect this same reality. Scientific texts are not just collections of data and conclusions—they are rich landscapes of cautious optimism, measured skepticism, and, crucially, hundreds of ways to admit, “We don’t fully know.” In this world, words like “possible,” “remains unclear,” “we hypothesize,” or “the evidence is inconclusive” become as significant as any hard number or equation. Reading between the lines is not a luxury, but a necessity: only by identifying the contours of certainty and uncertainty can science progress authentically. ### Why Does Mapping Uncertainty Matter? Uncertainty marks the edges of knowledge. When researchers hedge their statements or highlight the limits of a finding, they are—often unwittingly—placing flags for the next expedition into the unknown. These signals are crucial for other scientists, for policymakers sifting through complex reports, and for anyone seeking to distinguish established facts from open questions. But language is slippery, and context is everything. A “may” can express a minor doubt or substantial knowledge gap depending on where and how it’s used. Traditional computational tools have often failed here. Even the most advanced AI struggles to consistently recognize the nuanced signals of scientific doubt, and the reasons behind AI decisions often remain opaque—a “black box” that few are comfortable trusting in critical contexts. ### UnScientify: Letting Machines Read Between the Lines Enter UnScientify. Instead of treating language as a bag of words or pouring everything into a deep-learning engine, this system adopts a rule-based, transparent approach. Drawing from 12 distinct patterns of uncertainty—from explicit statements (“remains unresolved”), to modal verbs (“might affect”), conditional reasoning (“if x, then possibly y”), indirect questions, and even scholarly disagreement—UnScientify annotates scientific texts sentence by sentence. Crucially, it doesn’t stop there: it also discerns who is expressing the uncertainty. Is this the author’s personal doubt, or a recitation of others’ skepticism? This matters enormously. Imagine two sentences: “We believe further research is needed,” and “Some studies suggest the results are unreliable.” They both communicate limits, but the source (and thus the weight) of uncertainty is different. UnScientify uses linguistic analysis (with tools such as spaCy and custom pattern-matching) to make these distinctions clear, providing not just a label but a rationale for each annotation. ### When Human-Designed Rules Beat Super AIs What good is all this pattern-hunting? To test UnScientify, the team pitted it against the most sophisticated AI models of our time: GPT-4, RoBERTa, SciBERT and more, using a carefully constructed, multidisciplinary dataset of almost 1,000 annotated sentences. UnScientify came out ahead, scoring an impressive 80.8% accuracy—surpassing all tested machine-learning and large language models. But the story doesn’t end at raw scores. UnScientify’s real triumph is its explainability. Where “black-box” AIs often flip-flop or leave humans guessing about their decisions, UnScientify shows its work: every detection is justified by its language rulebook. If a new kind of uncertainty emerges, domain experts can update the patterns—no retraining on enormous datasets required. ### Unlocking Better Communication in Science and Society Imagine a future where, with a click, every sentence carrying academic doubt is highlighted in a research paper; where policymakers can instantly see which findings are robust and which rest on shaky ground; where journalists and educators can model scientific caution with ease. By charting uncertainty, UnScientify offers a tool not just for text mining, but for transparency, trust, and better conversation between science, decision-makers, and the public. The implications ripple outwards. Science does not advance in leaps of absolute certainty, but in careful steps—each one marked by open questions. UnScientify stands to help make these questions visible, opening new paths for interdisciplinary research and genuine dialogue. ### Looking Further: Charting New Territories of Doubt While UnScientify already covers vital ground, the journey has only begun. The team aims to broaden its understanding, expand its training to new fields, and perhaps even hybridize linguistic clarity with the deep, abstruse capacities of modern AI. The project’s publicly available dataset is already fueling further research, encouraging scientists everywhere to refine the art of charting uncertainty. As we look to a future brimming with data—and questions—the real heroes may not be those who declare the answers, but those who help reveal the borders between what is known and what is still waiting to be explored. UnScientify is helping science learn to read its own hesitations—and in those hesitations, to find the seeds of its next revolutions. Original scientific publication: **Panggih Kusuma Ningrum, Philipp Mayr, Nina Smirnova, Iana Atanassova: Annotating scientific uncertainty: A comprehensive model using linguistic patterns and comparison with existing approaches, Journal of Informetrics, Volume 19, Issue 2, 2025: ****https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2025.101661** This article was written by Christian Kolle with the support of ChatGPT 4.1 based on the original scientific publication and reviewed by one of the researchers involved, Dr. Philipp Mayr.

A blog about making culture. Since 1999.

Professor of Data Science Djoerd Hiemstra can no longer be reached through his standard Radboud University email address. Anyone emailing him at this address is referred to a page explaining that he b...

About the Event The ACM/IEEE-CS Joint Conference on Digital Libraries (JCDL) is a premier international forum focused on research and practice in digital libraries, bridging technical, practical, and social dimensions. JCDL brings together researchers and practitioners from computer science, information science, librarianship, archival and museum studies, and diverse domains including technology, medicine, social sciences, law,

Vienna, AustriaJuly 27–August 1st, 2025

Nature, Published online: 04 June 2025; doi:10.1038/d41586-025-01739-z Group behind Retraction Watch aims to pinpoint the most influential flawed health data.

Registration is now open! About the School The European Summer School on Information Retrieval (ESSIR) is held regularly, providing high-quality teaching of Information Retrieval (IR) and advanced IR topics to an audience of researchers and research students. The mission of the school is to enable

🔍 Call for proposals: BCS Search Solutions 2025, the UK’s leading forum on Search & IR, is back 26 Nov @ BCS London! We’re seeking talks related to Search research and practice (AI, bias, UX, LLMs & more). Submit by 11 July. Details: https://www.bcs.org/membership-and-registrations/member-communities/information-retrieval-specialist-group/conferences-and-events/search-solutions/ #SearchSolutions #IR #AI #UX #LLM