Viewing profile — anishrverma
anishrverma
HN member- Joined
- Sat, Jun 04, 2022, 4:34 AM UTC
- HN karma
- 9
- Public activity
- 15 items
- HN profile
- View on Hacker News ↗
About anishrverma
No profile information was provided.
Recent public activity
-
comment
Comment #48038448
We just posted a preprint describing one of the core technical ideas behind Liberata, in replacing discrete authorship positions with continuous contribution shares, then combining…
- story
-
comment
Comment #47781784
Agreed. Accountability matters, but changing the game usually scales better than hoping for better individual behaviour under the same pressures. Academia needs systems that reward…
-
comment
Comment #47781779
[dead]
-
comment
Comment #47781736
This is what makes the problem feel so systemic, in that weak consequences after the fact, and weak incentives for transparency before the fact. If the system mostly rewards output…
-
comment
Comment #47781726
I think this is the right tension, in that bad incentives matter, but that does not remove personal responsibility. We probably need both stronger accountability for clear miscondu…
-
comment
Comment #47781704
This (also) feels like a core failure mode, in that papers are optimized for skim-level persuasion because the system is too overloaded for deep evaluation at scale. Then a lot of …
-
comment
Comment #47781696
This feels like a core failure mode: papers are optimized for skim-level persuasion because the system is too overloaded for deep evaluation at scale. Then a lot of the actual scru…
-
comment
Comment #47781694
Strongly agree. When code, data, and workflow details stay hidden, the system rewards claims more than verification. That is where shortcuts, irreproducibility, and worse can thriv…
-
comment
Comment #47781691
I think this is exactly the hard part: individual virtue alone does not solve a system where supervisors, trainees, and funders are all pulled by the same incentives. "Do slower, b…
-
comment
Comment #47781546
[dead]
-
comment
Comment #46726682
I don’t read the NeurIPS statement as malicious per se, but I do think it’s incomplete They’re right that a citation error doesn’t automatically invalidate the technical content of…
-
comment
Comment #46726597
Yeah, spot on. If all we do is add more plausible sounding text on top of already fragile review and incentive structures, that really could make things worse rather than better Yo…
-
comment
Comment #46726575
Agreed. What I find more interesting is how easy these errors are to introduce and how unlikely they are to be caught. As you point out, a DOI checker would immediately flag this. …
-
comment
Comment #46726473
The prevalence of hallucinations in the system is another signs for change in the system. The citations should be treated less like narrative context and more like verifiable objec…