This seems to have unblocked Claude Desktop for Linux ( https://code.claude.com/docs/en/desktop-linux )
unfortunately no arch based distro support. I'm curious why it's not packaged as a flatpak.
Claude Science
51–60 of 199 posts
Re: Claude Science
#52Science isn’t suffering from a lack of papers. It’s suffering from a lack of good papers. Making it easier to just pump out paper-mill publications is about the last thing science needs right now.
Scientific research is suffering from a reproducibility crisis. Not a publication crisis. LLM's aren't going to solve reproducibility issues.
I'm actually quite excited for when (if) the models get good enough to start replicating compsci papers. I'd love it if there was a system which calculated a reproducibility score per-lab or per-researcher, which I could look up alongside their citation count.
I want to see who did the hard work properly, and who focused on publishing with concealed details.
Re: Claude Science
#53When I saw "Science" I didn't think they meant Data Science , which is what the UIs full of pandas code and plots imply. Even if the focus is on the sciences, I suspect that's the less valuable part of the announcement particularly with the implication of Jupyter Notebook 2.0. Image-understanding for data viz is a use case that has been ignored, and modern LLMs are getting better at proper EDA. But, uh, I may need to…
All of these new things are starting to look like soviet space program propaganda. Is there something really new?
Re: Claude Science
#54Earlier quoted context omitted.
They're gonna worsen it
Isn't this just blanket cynicism? In the long run conceivable we could use AI to hold papers to a much higher standard, audit all the data and code that is associated etc.
> audit all the data and code that is associated
For a while now there has been very little incentive for providing these alongside the paper, and I don't see why exactly 'AI' would change this. I could even see how making it vague to be harder to test with LLMs could be profitable for citation hackers.
Re: Claude Science
#55Science isn’t suffering from a lack of papers. It’s suffering from a lack of good papers. Making it easier to just pump out paper-mill publications is about the last thing science needs right now.
My hope is that the flood of AI articles pushes the academic publication system to its highly-anticipated breaking point. The most absurd part is that everyone in academia knows that publish or perish is tremendously damaging to real research. Yet we’re all hostage of this system that we created in the name of “merit” and “efficiency”. We need a different system to identify and reward talented hard-working people. Ba…
> My hope is that the flood of AI articles pushes the academic publication system to its highly-anticipated breaking point.
This will just make research inaccessible to most researchers. There is no incentive to limit publishing, at all, other than at the highest echelons. Publish or perish will just become worse. Look at what is happening to programming and extrapolate that to research work.
And all for what? Just to keep up this facade of society until most of society can be excised, whether artificially or naturally though lack of reproduction.
Re: Claude Science
#56Claude: "Not that science"
Re: Claude Science
#57"Pre-configured for your domain [...] cheminformatics" as in something like ChEMBL?
Re: Claude Science
#58Re: Claude Science
#59This seems to have unblocked Claude Desktop for Linux ( https://code.claude.com/docs/en/desktop-linux )
unfortunately no arch based distro support. I'm curious why it's not packaged as a flatpak.
Well, for Arch Linux, there was the unofficial version from the official binary in the AUR already... (Not sure what you mean by 'no arch based distro support').
Re: Claude Science
#60Earlier quoted context omitted.
> The lint flags em-dash overuse An explicit text desloppification pass (i.e. LLM-use obfuscation) seems like outright scientific fraud.
It sure is! But ironically, because of the intention behind the obfuscation. Not the fact that AI was used in a research paper. I have no issues with AI use in science. If claude can explain my research better than me, then have at it. But I do NOT want to read a passage thinking it was written by a human when it wasn't. Science has no idea yet how such disclosures should work yet. What should be done by humans as a…
Some authors may even choose to leave syntactical errors as a tell for those self-authored passages; long-term, some interesting language drifts may come of it.