Robot scientist finds less than one third of scientific results are reproducible

Re:Robot scientist finds less than one third of scientific r... by spicybright on Thursday April 07, 2022 @01:29PM (#30947672)

Their sample size was only 74 papers from one field of study.

It's easy to get onto the "science isn't working" bandwagon, but how about some more convincing evidence to prove it's happening as widespread as the claims they're making are.

You know... maybe treating it a bit more scientifically to prove your point.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Robot scientist finds less than one third of scientific r... by Bancakes on Friday April 08, 2022 @04:01AM (#30954489)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypergeometric_distribution

If it doesn't work for a well-picked sample, it probably doesn't work for the real world.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Robot scientist finds less than one third of scientific r... by lol_what on Friday April 08, 2022 @01:05PM (#30959712)

things like replication crisis being a matter of discourse is part of the scientific process. scientists notice results don't add up and slowly over time the thing corrects.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Robot scientist finds less than one third of scientific r... by Isinlor on Friday April 08, 2022 @03:41AM (#30954358)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Replication_crisis#Prevalence

[ Parent | on HN ]