News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Why Most Published Research Findings Are False by highcountess on Tuesday September 24, 2024 @09:09PM (#41642634)
I’ve been in a meeting with government research officials where a director of the primary global institution in that field described how when she writes or does research and writes papers she draws a graph she needs to support her research or a point she is trying to make and then goes to look for the data to create that graph.

Maybe I’m missing something, but I do not believe that is the way it is stopped to go. Btw, she has a PhD and failed up into a global scale.

I’ve been meaning to find out if there are any open tools to evaluate someone’s dissertation.

It was equal part stunning and seemingly a bit traumatizing to me considering I still remember it as if it had happened earlier today. I think what surprised me too was her open admission of it, even with external parties present.

Re:Why Most Published Research Findings Are False by randomdata on Tuesday September 24, 2024 @10:52PM (#41643258)
So she establishes a hypothesis (draws a graph or picks a point to make) and then tests it through experimentation (looks for data to support the hypothesis)? Isn't that just the scientific method worded another way?
Re:Why Most Published Research Findings Are False by elashri on Tuesday September 24, 2024 @11:23PM (#41643398)
Wait until the GP knows about how scientists generate Monte-Carlo (MC) simulation data to see what a positive results looks like and then do meta analysis for both real data and MC.