A good distinction between "peer reviewed" vs "computer verified"
>“The literature is growing faster and faster, peer review is overstrained, and we need technology to help us out,”
This is a problem in every field, not just Psychology.
I want someone to tell me the distribution (or average ratio) of papers read to papers written.
Every thesis written is supposed to add some delta to the state of the art. But there is no method for doing a diff between past and previous versions of human knowledge. How to make science less redundant and more efficient?
>“The literature is growing faster and faster, peer review is overstrained, and we need technology to help us out,”
This is a problem in every field, not just Psychology.
I want someone to tell me the distribution (or average ratio) of papers read to papers written.
Every thesis written is supposed to add some delta to the state of the art. But there is no method for doing a diff between past and previous versions of human knowledge. How to make science less redundant and more efficient?
I dream of aggregators for everything.