TE
科技回声
首页24小时热榜最新最佳问答展示工作
GitHubTwitter
首页

科技回声

基于 Next.js 构建的科技新闻平台,提供全球科技新闻和讨论内容。

GitHubTwitter

首页

首页最新最佳问答展示工作

资源链接

HackerNews API原版 HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 科技回声. 版权所有。

Reproducibility Initiative gets $1.3M grant to validate 50 cancer studies

236 点作者 djkn0x超过 11 年前

9 条评论

napoleoncomplex超过 11 年前
Reproducibility in science is something that badly needs this push. It&#x27;s an incredibly difficult &quot;sell&quot; to anyone with funds for research, and I&#x27;m extremely happy that they&#x27;ve found capital for it.<p>The foundations of our scientific knowledge need to be solidified, and from all the science news and developments, this one is the one that makes me by far the most excited for the future of science.<p>Next on the list, open source repositories for protocols of experiments! Maybe someone surprises me with a link to an existing solution :).
评论 #6562389 未加载
Osmium超过 11 年前
Honestly, I&#x27;m impressed $1.3M is enough for 50 studies! Though, of course, verification should be cheaper than the original research since you know exactly what to look for and how to find it.
评论 #6562018 未加载
评论 #6561909 未加载
评论 #6562189 未加载
irollboozers超过 11 年前
Science Exchange is leading and pushing ahead with this very important work. They are addressing what the public funders and private industry can&#x27;t and won&#x27;t do, but at scale this becomes really powerful. Great stuff.
评论 #6564025 未加载
DaveWalk超过 11 年前
I&#x27;d be interested to know <i>which</i> studies they are targeting. Is SciEx testing a key figure from an expansive publication, or the entire methodology from discoveries with few tests? To me, this seems to be a conceptually difficult decision to make...most discoveries do not discuss the number of years (or failed attempts) that goes by before obtaining the quantifiable result.<p>And where is the peer review in this process? I suppose as soon as something turns up unreproducible we will find out.
gabemart超过 11 年前
I don&#x27;t know very much about how reproducibility validation works. Is it the case that, if we assume p= ~0.05 and all 50 original studies are perfect, we would expect the first iteration of reproducibility validation to fail for ~2 of the 50 studies?
评论 #6561848 未加载
评论 #6561964 未加载
doctoboggan超过 11 年前
This is awesome. I met some of the people behind The Center For Open Science at SciPy this year. They seemed very passionate. I hope the idea of reproducing experiments as a matter of course becomes more common. Maybe in the future to be a reputable scientist you will have had to reproduce many of the current experiments of the time.
dnautics超过 11 年前
this is really phenomenal. Congratulations, SE.
ypandit超过 11 年前
Congratulations SciEx !
brianbreslin超过 11 年前
awesome congrats guys!