News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on People have no idea which sciences are robust. Parent comment

Re:People have no idea which sciences are robust by jhbadger on Sunday March 05, 2017 @02:32PM (#13798007)
The comment I was responding to was specifically calling out biology as "squishy". As a computational biologist myself, I have experience in getting my purely computational papers rejected before I learned that you have to collaborate with experimentalists to get a really good paper.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:People have no idea which sciences are robust by xaa on Monday March 06, 2017 @10:28AM (#13803261)
(Fellow CB here) I have had the same experience. Although I think this phenomenon is because of a heavily empirical bias in biology, not because the experimental data that is usually paired with comp bio models is actually all that useful in supporting the model.

"Generate hypothesis with CB and present experimental data that is mostly irrelevant to it" seems to be a good recipe for getting Nature papers, actually.

[ Parent | on HN ]