News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Jeff Dean Responds to EDA Industry about AlphaChip. Parent comment

Re:Jeff Dean Responds to EDA Industry about AlphaChip by sanxiyn on Sunday December 01, 2024 @05:51PM (#42291331)
I think the paper was probably done honestly, but also very poorly. They claimed synthesis of 36 new materials. When reviewed, for 24/36 "the predicted structure has ordered cations but there is no evidence for order, and a known, disordered version of the compound exists". In fact, with other errors, 36/36 claims were doubtful. This reflects badly for authors and worse for peer review process of Nature.

https://x.com/Robert_Palgrave/status/1744383962913394758

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Jeff Dean Responds to EDA Industry about AlphaChip by mrguyorama on Monday December 02, 2024 @03:40PM (#42300167)
>worse for peer review process of Nature.

Every scientist will tell you that "peer reviewed" is not a mark of quality, correctness, impact, value, accuracy, whatever.

Scientists care about replication. More correctly, they care that your work can be built upon. THAT is evidence of good science.

[ Parent | on HN ]