top | item 46720654

(no title)

godzillabrennus | 1 month ago

Have they solved the issue where papers that cite research already invalidated are still being cited?

discuss

order

cogman10|1 month ago

AFAIK, no, but I could see there being cause to push citations to also cite the validations. It'd be good if standard practice turned into something like

Paper A, by bob, bill, brad. Validated by Paper B by carol, clare, charlotte.

or

Paper A, by bob, bill, brad. Unvalidated.

gcr|1 month ago

Academics typically use citation count and popularity as a rough proxy for validation. It's certainly not perfect, but it is something that people think about. Semantic Scholar in particular is doing great work in this area, making it easy to see who cites who: https://www.semanticscholar.org/

Google Scholar's PDF reader extension turns every hyperlinked citation into a popout card that shows citation counts inline in the PDF: https://chromewebstore.google.com/detail/google-scholar-pdf-...

reliabilityguy|1 month ago

Nope.

I am still reviewing papers that propose solutions based on a technique X, conveniently ignoring research from two years ago that shows that X cannot be used on its own. Both the paper I reviewed and the research showing X cannot be used are in the same venue!

b00ty4breakfast|1 month ago

does it seem to be legitimate ignorance or maybe folks pushing ahead regardless of x being disproved?