Science topics: Scientific Communication
Science topic

Scientific Communication - Science topic

Explore the latest questions and answers in Scientific Communication, and find Scientific Communication experts.
Questions related to Scientific Communication
  • asked a question related to Scientific Communication
Question
5 answers
I am passionate about differents subjects and conduct my own personal research for myself, just because I am curious. I wonder if this type of research would be considered as valid or ethical by the scientific community if it comes from a student who is still not holding a degree.
Relevant answer
Answer
In my opinion, science is based on the curiosity of discovering everything that is new and useful, the degree refining knowledge. So if the research you are working on is based on a valid scientific basis, and you have references to rely on in its performance, then I do not find that there is a problem with that. My sincere gratitude to all.
  • asked a question related to Scientific Communication
Question
2 answers
dear scientific community
I use high score for XRD analysis, but I need to get an idea about the best software
thank you in advance for your collaboration
Relevant answer
Answer
JADE is a software where everything you need for XRD Pattern Processing
More user friendly like Xpert-high score plus
  • asked a question related to Scientific Communication
Question
5 answers
With the advances in community review and Web3 on the horizon, I've been starting to wonder if the way in which traditional peer-review works is outdated. Have y'all found any systems out there that feel like the future of peer-review?
Relevant answer
Answer
That is the matter of reality. We have to face it. In recent years the number of retractions in journals, even top journals has increased.
Even when an article had been retracted many years ago, other authors were or are still citing them as a part of their literature review. For example lets have a look at this paper:
  • "Regression of human metastatic renal cell carcinoma after vaccination with tumor cell–dendritic cell hybrids" published in: Nature Medicine volume 6, pages332–336 (2000).
But in this URL we find the retraction note
Retraction date is sept 2003.
But a Google Scholar search shows, it has been cited 59 times, by different researchers, from 2018 up to now. Now let's ask ourselves where were/are peer reviewers? (in such a case)
After start of Covid 19 a "Paper Rush" began, every one wanted to be the first or among the first ones to have it in his field of teaching, expertise. So now there are a huge number of retracted papers just on Covid 19.
The problem so tense, some researchers addressed it in this article with a term "PAPERDEMIC" to attract concerns
  • "COVID-19 research: pandemic versus “paperdemic”, integrity, values and risks of the “speed science”" DOI 10.1080/20961790.2020.1767754
and then among too many other articles about the problems with peer review, these two articles by the New York Times:
  • "Two Huge Covid-19 Studies Are Retracted After Scientists Sound Alarms"
and this one
"The Pandemic Claims New Victims: Prestigious Medical Journals: Two major study retractions in one month have left researchers wondering if the peer review process is broken"
  • When we follow the cases of retractions in different journals, the role of whistleblowers is great. Now they have become gatekeepers of science . So it is a kind of "Post peer review" that is of great help. I firmly believe peer review in scientific research is gatekeeper of our health, life, nature, future and other good things, but we need new methods, as far as I have been thinking about and testing, post peer review could be a valuable option. Let me quote a sentence from the above mentioned article. "The truth is that the “scientific research has changed the world” but now, and more than ever, “it needs to change itself” (Ricardo Jorge Dinis-Oliveira, 2020) DOI: 10.1080/20961790.2020.1767754
  • asked a question related to Scientific Communication
Question
3 answers
We often struggle to select the “best” statistical modeling solution in ecological research. The ease of doing complex statistics like generalized linear mixed models (GLMM) in R with advanced computers revolutionizes our computing ability. Still, if I dig deep inside, sometimes I feel that following “all” preconditions for model selection is challenging. For example, it mainly happens when the target variable follows a nonlinear distribution in which current software and programming environments like R, Stata, SPSS, or SAS do not provide a perfect distribution function of the target variable. As a result, we often need an “approximate” distribution for the target variable in the modeling. It may further lead to the wrong decision on the selection of the link function, which can violate the assumption of linearity between transformed expected response and explanatory variables. Recently, we have faced a significant problem in studying the influence of multiple biotic and abiotic variables on the crown dieback of trees in urban and peri-urban forests (n = 2968 trees). The crown dieback followed a bimodal nonlinear distribution and each explanatory variable had different exponential probability distribution. As a result, traditional techniques, like GLMM, could not be used after having a lengthy discussion, literature review, and a lot of “playing” with R!
Some statisticians suggest using generalized additive modeling (GAM) in this situation. However, my colleagues and I will be new to GAM, so we must first spend some time understanding the theory and technicalities.
Therefore, my questions to the scientific community are:
1. When to use GAM?
2. What should be the preconditions of the data, if any?
3. Is there any good open access repository where we can learn more about using GAM, case studies, data, or freely available code?
Your support will be highly appreciated.
Relevant answer
Answer
I've shifted to using GAMs more and more. They have way more flexibility and you have greater control over how much 'wiggliness' or non-linearity you allow. For example, you can fit an entirely linear model with a GAM and you will get the same result as using a GLM. A couple other bonuses for using GAMs are that random effects are fit using ridge splines so that the underlying fitting process is more similar to Bayesian than ML approaches. Also, you can penalize the null space of splines which is an efficient way of model selection. All of this requires a bit of reading to understand the theory, but essentially the output of the model will tell you whether a variable should be included in the model or not, as well as if it should be linear or non-linear.
In R, the best place to start is the 'mgcv' package. The documentation for this by Simon Wood is extremely well-written and helpful. I would also check out some of Wood's books and publications on GAMs, including Woods 2017 (https://doi.org/10.1201/9781315370279). Again, there has been a lot of work put into these models and it shows when using them.
Best of luck!
  • asked a question related to Scientific Communication
Question
8 answers
Kindly discuss your ideas and viewpoints on the origin of life and the RNA world hypothesis.
What are the contradictory views on why researchers are still unsure about the origin of life through RNA or such analogous molecular intermediate pre-cursors preceding its existence?
"The general notion of an “RNA World” is that, in the early development of life on the Earth, genetic continuity was assured by the replication of RNA and genetically encoded proteins were not involved as catalysts. There is now strong evidence indicating that an RNA World did indeed exist before DNA- and protein-based life. However, arguments regarding whether life on Earth began with RNA are more tenuous. It might be imagined that all of the components of RNA were available in some prebiotic pool and that these components assembled into replicating, evolving polynucleotides without the prior existence of any evolved macromolecules. A thorough consideration of this “RNA-first” view of the origin of life must reconcile concerns regarding the intractable mixtures that are obtained in experiments designed to simulate the chemistry of the primitive Earth. Perhaps these concerns will eventually be resolved, and recent experimental findings provide some reason for optimism. However, the problem of the origin of the RNA World is far from being solved, and it is fruitful to consider the alternative possibility that RNA was preceded by some other replicating, evolving molecule, just as DNA and proteins were preceded by RNA." - Robertson and Joyce
[This is as per the explanation by Michael P Robertson and Gerald F Joyce in the article: "The origins of the RNA world." published in the Cold Spring Harb. Perspect. Biol. 4, a003608 (2012).]
The scientific community must resolve this contradicting conjecture through rational discussion and debate backed by strong experimental evidence on what must be the pre-cursor molecule to the Origin of Life if it is not RNA!
Relevant answer
Answer
One of the issues that is holding the concept of an RNA world back from being more scientifically useful - irrespective of whether there ever was such a thing - is that we don't use the idea in the scientific way it was intended. Just like any other prebiotic scenario, it is not (nor has it ever been) a scientific hypothesis. In fact, scenarios are usually not intended as such. Scenario authors from all niches (including RNA world) have pointed out that scenarios themselves are untestable. However, they guide thinking and allow to conceive of hypotheses that are testable. If we go through the old literature we find very explicit passages to support this fact.
For the specific authors advanced in the question, G.F. Joyce and L.E. Orgel, we have a passage from 1999 in "prospects for understanding the origins of the RNA world". (The RNA World 2nd ed. 49-77).
"The presumed RNA World should be viewed as a milestone, a plateau in the early history of life on earth. So too, the concept of an RNA World has been a milestone in the scientific study of life's origins. Although this concept does not explain how life originated, it has helped to guide scientific thinking and has served to focus experimental efforts."
You can find this point of view expressed in foundational work for all niches related to the popular scenarios today. But you can also find it for scenarios most people in origins have never heard of. E.g. the idea that celllular life started with terpenoids found in G. Ourisson and Y. Nakatomi's "the terpenoid theory of the origin of cellular life: the evolution of terpenoids to cholesterol. (1994) Chem & Biol. 1 11-23".
"The hypothesis provides an attractive way of ordering the terpenoids: like all evolutionary theories, it cannot be tested directly. The ideas summarized here do, however, suggest a multitude of experiments having some bearing on the fundamental and fascinating question: how did the first cells appear? We hope to carry out some of them."
A related line of thought - but highly influential - is the exposition by Harold J. Morowitz from 1992 in his book "Beginnings of Cellular Life: Metabolism Recapitulates Biogenesis". If we go to the conclusion, we find this explicit clarification on the distinction between a genuine scientific theory and a scenario:
"at this stage of the thought process, it is important to focus on the hypothesis that intermediary metabolism recapitulates prebiotic chemical evolution. This hypothesis is not a strictly vulnerable theory in the Popperian sense, but it does provide us with a valuable heuristic method for using modern knowledge of biochemistry to search for events that have left their trace. If the intermediary metabolism of autotrophs does not recapitulate biogenesis, then the discontinuities will have to be explained."
More than 2 decades back, many authors made a clear distinction regarding this nuance. Scenarios are here to help: they guide thinking and design experiments. They only guide thinking in a scientifically meaningful direction as long as we can easily abondon scenarios and enthusiastically continue replacing them with new, more informed scenarios. A situation where a scenario gets entrenched and where researchers treat it as a scientific hypothesis is - by construction - hard to escape.
In fact, this is exactly the situation that many researchers have described around the 80s, when criticism mounted against the prebiotic broth scenario. The passage from Wächtershäuser's 1988 "Theory of a Surface Metabolism" is telling:
"The prebiotic broth theory has received devastating criticism for being logically paradoxical (11, 135), incompatible with thermodynamics (11, 144, 160), chemically and geochemically implausible (134, 136, 144), discontinuous with biology and biochemistry (160), and experimentally refuted (135, 160). The reason for the tenacity with which it is retained as accepted dogma has been forcefully and clearly stated by Scherer (126): "If this rejection is substantiated, there will remain no scientifically valid model of the selforganization of the first living cells on earth."
Clearly, the broth scenario had overstayed its welcome. One reason for this is that its 'claims' (which for a scenario can only be speculations) were too much in contradiction with claims from fields of science that do not suffer the same restrictions when it comes to testing and refuting their theories. One example of a very controversial idea that can be found in Haldane's formulation of a broth scenario, is the purported necessity of a long, highly functional protein randomly emerging from a soup, as an extremely rare event: we expect this to be prohibitively unlikely and hence a far from parsimonious explanation.
Quite a few of the critiques voiced against the prebiotic broth scenario are equally valid critiques of some scenarios we have today, including RNA world.
The RNA world is an old and multifaceted concept. There are contrasting formulations that make different claims (to be interpreted as speculations) about history. As with the prebiotic broth scenario (and any scenario), it has raised genuine scientific objections. These have remained largely unadressed, in spite of its long dominance.
It is instructive to bear in mind that scenarios don't come from nowhere. They're fairly detailed speculations about purported historical events. To make them, each author makes assumptions. Some of these concern speculations that later became testable, e.g. about chemistry and physics. You will find different scenario authors make different assumptions and different arguments (and flaws therein). There's an inevitable bias here with respect to the fields an author is trained in. Some of the foundational assumptions in popular scenarios like RNA world are at least 50 years old, but some unchallenged assumptions date back to a literature that is more than a century old. A time before IUPAC, modern quantum mechanics, genetics, and so forth.
That has been enough time to forget that scenarios like RNA world are by construction not testable hypotheses and that they were not intended as such. Scenarios are here to guide thinking, to inspire experiments. The best thing a scenario can do for us, is generate insights that spur us to change the way we think and thereby necessitate replacing our old scenarios with new ones, and repeat the cycle. The science coming out of the community today is a lot more conducive to doing that than previously.
The same cannot be said for the rather myopic RNA-centric framing of a question in the cited passage, which attempts to elevate RNA world to more than a scenario. Rather than forcing ourselves to think about the rather narrow and outdated proposal by Joyce and Robertson, ("consider the alternative possibility that RNA was preceded by some other replicating, evolving molecule"), it is more productive to critically revisit all the things that have been assumed and argued when the concept of an RNA world was conceived and how which of these premises are considered valid or plausible today, and which ones back then. Is there a formulation of RNA world for abiogenesis that is logically sufficient? And if so is it logically necessary that abiogenesis proceeded this way?
It is also instructive to check how much of the logic was sound. e.g. the rhetorical tricks employed in RNA world introduce all sorts of hidden assumptionsm.
As an example of the latter: some still justify an RNA world by the party trick 'chicken-and-egg' question 'protein or RNA, which came first?', only to conclude with 'RNA, it encodes proteins' and hastily conclude with an even stronger 'RNA-first' for abiogenesis. 'chicken-and-egg' fallacies are nothing new in origins. In fact, they were already identified as such long ago. E.g. in chapter 8 of "Seven Clues to the Origin of Life (1985)" by Cairns-Smith, there's an illustrated passage detailing that these types of paradoxes in origins frame the question in a manner that prevent us from considering scaffolds.
"
The fact is that even the so-called simple organisms such as E. coli are very complex enterprises with all sorts of things going on together. There is plenty of scope for accidental discoveries of effective new combinations of subsystems. It seems inevitable that every so often an older way of doing things will be displaced by a newer way that depends on a new set of subsystems. It is then that seemingly paradoxical collaborations may come about.
To see how, consider this very simplified model - an arch of stones: This might seem to be a paradoxical structure if you had been told that it arose from a succession of small modifications, that it had been built one stone at a time.
scaffolds that starts like this:
This might seem to be a paradoxical structure if you had been told that it arose from a succession of small modifications, that it had been built one stone at a time. How can you build any kind of arch gradually? The answer is with a supporting scaffolding. In this case you might have used a scaffolding of stones. First you would build a wall, one stone at a time:
Then you would remove stones to leave the 'paradoxical' structure.
"
It should be noted that in 2022, even in RNA-world, very few scholars remain that find RNA-first a convincing idea. As a scenario, however, it is not useless: it is instructive to consider what the underlying ideas are that at some point in time made such a highly specific idea compelling to so many of us.
A fixed motif in scenario papers is to start explicitly and implicitly assuming a few things about what chemistry can and cannot do and some properties of abiogenesis. These sort of assumptions used to be spelled out routinely, also outside scenario papers. Let me give two examples.
The original 1953 paper for the "Frank Model" "on spontaneous asymmetric synthesis", has the passages
".. the defining property of a living entity the ability to reproduce its own kind ...
confining attention to chemical molecules, the complexity of any having this essential property of life is likely to be great enough to make it highly improbable that it has a centre of symmetry."
(*I should point out that Frank makes an important error here: the capacity for molecular reproduction is not a molecular property but a property of a reaction network. If we add an additional thermodynamic criterion this property is autocatalysis and we can then check this claim from the IUPAC definition: https://goldbook.iupac.org/terms/view/C00876. It turns out there are trivial ways to make small networks that have this property https://chemrxiv.org/engage/api-gateway/chemrxiv/assets/orp/resource/item/60c74d67469df42226f44295/original/emergent-autocat-animation.gif.)
The point to retain here is that Frank considers it to be generally accepted that one can assume this property to be prohibitively rare in chemistry. This belief was wideheld, and we can e.g. read in "the units of selection" (1970) by Lewontin a summary on scientific views on abiogenesis
"The present view ... Since there was no autocatalysis, there was no reproduction or heredity and so no possibility of natural selection."
The coacervates in Oparins scenario were notably invoked to adress this issue.
When it comes to assumptions in scenarios, this systematically involved conjecturing that chemistry 'in the wild' intrinsically and deterministically becomes a 'mess', undergoing no meaningful complexification, and for which no reproduction and evolution can reasonably be expected. From there, it appears that no process of abiogenesis should conceivably occur naturally, and thereafter some specific sequence of exceptional events is proposed as plausible, because it appears to be the sole contender.
Let us make more explicit why this is not an innocent procedure:
We still find our understanding of 'basic chemistry' to be plagued with limitations and long-lived misinterpretations (e.g. 2 days ago we learned that methyl substitution destabilizes radicals instead of the textbook knowledge that it stabilizes them ).
Moving beyond the basics, we by and large lack a lot of formal theory, experiment, or even a simple reference frame for the things that happen then. Joyce and Robertson honor the tradition of purporting from the outset that 'chemistry in the wild' becomes an intractable mess. The issue is that we don't know at all if that's the case. We cannot assume this from the outset, we need to extensively study it. We require extensive experiments and theory and a reference frame for all the phenomenology associatied with complex systems (e.g. multiple components, compartments, multiple forms of nonequilibrium driving, length scales, time scales).
In making the routine assumption of 'messy, intractable chemistry that can neither complexify nor multiply', we have decided in advance that, once we finally understand 'chemistry in the wild' with its 'so-called intractible mixtures', it cannot have any bearing on abiogenesis. Let alone explain it.
That is a disproportionately bold conjecture about fundamental science, and a very consequential one: all historical scenarios - RNA world being one out of many - have been justified by formulating conjectures of this sort (many authors also insist on other properties, e.g. chemistry being deterministic). Clearly, it should be the first priority of everyone in the field to test this conjecture, by extensively and rigorously studying complex chemical systems as an end in itself. If the conjecture is correct, it provides an important validation for historical scenario approaches. If the conjecture turn out wrong, we are in a much better position to conceive of more scientifically informed scenarios, but potentially the approach will change entirely.
In presenting it as such, I am making it appear as if it could be an open question whether the chemical conjectures underpinning our scenarios in origins may be true or not. In fact, we have learned quite a few things in the meantime. And some clumsy mistakes were made elsewhere.
- Determinism:
When it comes to chemistry being deterministic (a key tennet of e.g. Sutherlands scenario and Wächtershäusers surface metabolism): upon critical evaluation of what is known of basic chemistry this idea becomes unacceptable, especially when considering the chemical processes on the surface of a planet, as opposed to a quick reaction in pyrex.
1) insofar as it is reproducible, modern chemistry owes much of it to big strides of standardization in glassware, methodology, synthesis protocols (e.g. usage of stirring bars).
2) lab chemistry exhibits many forms of contingency. This is particularly the case when it comes to phase behavior, e.g. habit modification, polymorphism. Aspirin purportedly has 8 reported polymorphs, phenobarbitone 13.
3) glassware is cleaned between reactions, thereby making successive reactions in the same glassware independent. In nature, this property of independence is absent. In fact, effort to make an evolutionary classification of minerals are rooted in the opposite: that certain minerals start to form conditional on the presence of certain others. (https://pubs.geoscienceworld.org/msa/ammin/article/104/6/810/570840/An-evolutionary-system-of-mineralogy-Proposal-for)
- Autocatalysis:
A first issue to get out of the way is the misconception that autocatalysis is prohibitively rare. A prominent PI in origins (RNA world, not a chemist) told me that chemists throughout history have found exactly one example. Claims about the contents of a literature one cannot realistically have read in a lifetime is a common error we can find in the origins literature. Below are some reviews.
I should stress that these reviews discuss examples from a few niches in chemistry. These reviews do at least allow to have 100s of counterexamples to dubious claims about no autocatalysis in chemistry, but it's only a small fraction. Virtually all branches of chemistry have regular reports of autocatalysis, but very few focus on autocatalysis in its own right. And hence most branches do not review their reported examples.
By critically examining the IUPAC definitions, one can show that autocatalysis is dramatially more widespread than long thought. In part, this is because the definition applies to a wealth of situations where the term is not routinely employed. By examinging the requirements of autocatalysis as an emergent network property, one can demonstrate that this property emerges particularly readily in a heterogeneous / multicompartment context. With the disclaimer that I'm an author I refer to the following:
- Messy chemistry:
Refreshing counterexamples are afforded by the literature on systems chemistry and dynamic combinatorial libraries.
In the context of origins, a recent work that is greatly aiding in fixing our misconceptions is : https://www.nature.com/articles/s41557-022-00956-7
Where a reaction of purported immense complexity is found to exhibit highly reproducible and ordered behavior as function of environmental inputs. How chemistry exactly works on this level is still poorly understood. I think I do, but it'll have to await peer review. But we cannot in good scientific conscience take for granted anymore that chemistry becomes messy and intractable. When we do the experiments, we see something very different.
in conclusion, I want to come back to the final point of the question
"The scientific community must resolve this contradicting conjecture through rational discussion and debate backed by strong experimental evidence on what must be the pre-cursor molecule to the Origin of Life if it is not RNA!"
No. The sientific community should strive to do what it can justify scientifically. Those that find it fruitful to relegate the RNA world - which is not a hypothesis - are justified in doing so. Notably because it is is founded on scientifically refuted premises and logical errors.
Those that find ways to make it fruitful to keep it are justified in doing so: it's a scenario, one can draw inspiration from it. Perhaps a thoroughly altered version can be developed that fixes previous issues.
Above all else, RNA is an amazing molecule that has been used for fundamental research that concerns everyone in origins, and will continue to do so irrespective of how serious the RNA world scenario is still taken.
What the origins of life community needs, first and foremost, however, is concern itself with more important matters.
Complex chemistry needs to be studied thoroughly on an experimental and theoretical level.
New scenarios are needed. And these scenarios should no longer require chemistry to have properties it doesn't have, and vice versa. These scenarios should also explicitly be appraciated for what they are, an for what they're not. They're here to help, to guide thinking, inspire experiments, produce testable predictions, update our beliefs. They are not scientific hypotheses in and of themselves.
  • asked a question related to Scientific Communication
Question
9 answers
Dear Scholars/Scientists/Researchers,
What is the genus name of white leg shrimp? Some authors state species name as Litopenaeus vannamei and some as Penaeus vannamei? Are these two names of the same species?
Thank you for your answers.
Relevant answer
Answer
Whiteleg shrimp (Litopenaeus vannamei, synonym Penaeus vannamei), also known as Pacific white shrimp or King prawn, is a species of prawn of the eastern Pacific Ocean commonly caught or farmed for food.
Whiteleg shrimp - Wikipedia
  • asked a question related to Scientific Communication
Question
1 answer
Of course, the samples' Cts do not fall within the standard curve.
Just curious about the scientific community's impressions on this topic because we recently discussed it in our lab.
Relevant answer
Answer
ct values above 40 are not considered as the fine category values to calculate the relative mRNA expressions. usually, when we set the qPCR, the maximum cycle we set is 40. In order to get the desired cycle ratio; one way to do this is by increasing the DNA concentration.
  • asked a question related to Scientific Communication
Question
4 answers
I am a student of biotechnology and an independent SARS CoV-2 researcher from India. For finding the academia research status and analysis of the integration of innovation with research, I have created a set of Multiple choice type questions about your experience as a researcher. The google form requires nothing but your honesty and openness for research. Feel free to ask questions and DM. The questions will assist in gauging the level of innovation and writing in academia.
If possible, please do forward this little form to your fellow researchers and other amazing scientists. I would be highly grateful.
Thank you
Relevant answer
Answer
Hello sir, Asif Bilal
Just saw your response. It means a lot to me. Thank you so much for your time.
If possible, could you please forward the survey to other amazing scientists, It would help me a lot.
  • asked a question related to Scientific Communication
Question
5 answers
I would like to pursue a career as a Biomedical/Scientific communicator and that requires me to get some recognised writing experience before I apply for such a position in any company. I am a current BSc Biomedical Science student graduating next year (summer 2023) but my previous background is science-business related and at a Master's level. I do a lot of academic writing which is outside of the course-related requirements, as I like doing some research and learning more from doing so. I share my findings with work colleagues and relatives only so far and am in process of starting my blog online. Advice is greatly appreciated!
Relevant answer
Answer
Does this mean you want to publish it on a website or blog rather than in a journal? The latter is obviously much time-consuming but strongly improves your credibility in that area.
  • asked a question related to Scientific Communication
Question
1 answer
Dear scientific community,
i am currently trying to make more sense of the voluntary disclosure theory and the associated models. As far as i understood, the theory relies on the principal agent theory and incorporates the benefits for a company to reveal and provide more information then required by the lawmakers and other authorities. My questions are:
- Can the additional corporate reports and blog posts on sales, strategic partnerships or other aspects of the enterprise evolvement be assigned to this theory? Or is this theory strictly for accounting/ market popolicymaking?
- Is there any good literature review or paper describing the state of research on this theory?
- Is there any known paper transferring this theory into the setting of any kind of ecosystems such as platform ecosystems?
- Is there any research call to instantiate this theory for specific entrepreneurial phenomena?
I would be thankful for any advice.
Thank you a lot in advance.
Best Regards
Dimitri Petrik
Relevant answer
Answer
One of my paper on theory applied in Voluntary disclosure.
  • asked a question related to Scientific Communication
Question
7 answers
All about article retraction in academic publishing
Retraction is removing an article from the scientific record at any point after its publication. Retraction is distinct from withdrawal, which occurs prior to publication. Also, in contrast to withdrawal, retractions are visible to the scientific community, as the original papers are typically preserved as part of the publication record.
Relevant answer
Answer
Retraction of an article by a journal can be due to many reasons. And all good journals have their own rules.
1. It can be a misconduct like cheating, plagiarism, unethical experiments, faking results, faculty publishing student's results with student's knowledge etc....... Such articles retracted by journals are a good step and the authors must face the repercussions. I would be happy saying, if proven they should be boycotted among the scientific fraternity.
2. Publication of a new species which is not new is ok for me. It may or may not have bad effects depending on the organisation of such authors. Any retraction of such articles has no value because it is still considered published as per codes of nomenclature, even if it is present on online version but not on printed. Around 70,000 names in orchid of which around 27000 are accepted. It is not a big thing. But some universities at least I know in Asia pay their researchers on every peer-reviewed international publication. So how that university will react, the authors have to face. There is no black spot on the integrity of such researchers as such unless they keep making mistakes and keep taking rewards.
3. I will tell you another incident where I know that the funders paid the authors to put the name of the new species on funder's name. This is believe is an unethical behaviour however, there is no rule which says this is wrong. And, such articles are still considered published.
4. There another famous case of a species being stolen from the country of original and brought to USA and named by scientists in USA. This many considered illegal and unethical. It brought bad name to the organisation. Plus, there was a recommendation published which requested the International Code of Nomenclature to reject this name, however, it was not accepted.
Thanks
Pankaj
  • asked a question related to Scientific Communication
Question
1 answer
What methods can you recommend for determining the amount of carbon (C) when studying the chemical composition of BIOchar products from various wastes, which is one of the developing agricultural technologies in the world?
Relevant answer
Answer
Biomass waste materials appropriate for biochar production include crop residues from agriculture, forestry, municipal solid waste food and animal manures, etc . The biochar derived from biomass is a highly rich source of carbon produced from biomass using thermal combustion in an oxygen-limited environment .Biochar has received the consideration of numerous analysts in building up their proficiency to remediate contaminants. Process parameters are fundamentally answerable for deciding the yield of biomass. Biochar derived from biomass is an exceptionally rich wellspring of carbon produced from biomass utilizing thermal combustion.
  • asked a question related to Scientific Communication
Question
17 answers
Dear Colleagues and Friends from RG,
What are the main problems in the development of science?
What are the key problems of research development?
What are the limitations for research work?
What do you think are the main problems with publishing research results?
Are these financial constraints or other problems?
How can these problems be solved?
What do you think about it?
What's your opinion on this topic?
Please reply,
I invite everyone to the discussion,
Thank you very much,
Best regards,
Dariusz Prokopowicz
Relevant answer
Answer
In developing countries, the main problem for development of science is lack of interest of ruling class, lack of funds and infrastructure are some important problem/hurdle in the development of science.
  • asked a question related to Scientific Communication
Question
4 answers
Hello scientific community.
My question is methodological. If I plan to establish a cross-national study, is there a definite number of countries? and if so do study participants have to be from all continents?
Relevant answer
Answer
It will be an excellent perspective!! Thank you.
  • asked a question related to Scientific Communication
Question
8 answers
If one uses his/her publications as chapters of his/her thesis then will it account for self-plagiarism? And if the answer is "yes" then why Ph.D students are ask to publish their work before writing their thesis.
Relevant answer
Answer
It fully depends on the Ph.D. examination regulations of the respective university.
  • asked a question related to Scientific Communication
Question
21 answers
Get in touch for more info.
Relevant answer
Answer
interested
  • asked a question related to Scientific Communication
Question
25 answers
For the first time in the practice of a scientific communication, I offer to transform a published article in presentation with much more illustrations and additional comments (including voice comments) to facilitate understanding of the ideas contained in a scientific paper. What is your opinion about?
The presentation: ProtoPhysiology and the origin of life (multimedia article) https://youtu.be/fSZ2h5-IJgI  - 38 min
The presentation is the audio-video form of my paper: Matveev, V.V. (2017) Comparison of fundamental physical properties of the model cells (protocells) and the living cells reveals the need in protophysiology, International Journal of Astrobiology, 16(1), pp.97–104. doi: 10.1017/S1473550415000476; URL: http://journals.cambridge.org/abstract_S1473550415000476
Relevant answer
Answer
Social media: friend or foe? It’s a question that has inspired much hand-wringing in academia (and society at large) in recent years. Our latest spotlight collection brings together resources to help academics and universities harness the positive opportunities afforded by this powerful tool while considering potential issues such as online abuse and well-being...
  • asked a question related to Scientific Communication
Question
3 answers
Dear Researchers,
Greetings for the day !
My name is Shard and I completed B.S. Marine Engineering from Birla Institute of Technology, Pilani, Rajasthan, in 2006 and then M.S. Information Technology (Application Development) from Sunderland University, United Kingdom, in 2010. I also did my second master's degree i.e, MSc Mathematics from Shoolini University in 2021.
I'm a Research Scholar in Yogananda School of AI, Computer and Data Sciences and currently pursuing the Ph.D. degree in Mathematics at Shoolini University, Solan, Himachal Pradesh, India. Also, working as Assistant Professor in Shoolini University since 2014.
My areas of interest in research includes "Technology adoption using mathematical models and statistical tools like SPSS and also waste management energy".
I'm actively looking for research collaborations with national/international collaborators to be the contributor in the scientific community.
Wamly,
Shard
+91-8219639808
Relevant answer
Answer
Dear Mr. Shard!
May I kindly suggest you to sign up to Elsevier Researcher Academy a free of charge portal with wide range of resources and contacts:
In addition you can find useful research community networks on LinkedIn:
Yours sincerely, Bulcsu Szekely
  • asked a question related to Scientific Communication
Question
2 answers
Without any context, what story/narrative you can get/guess from this figure?
What other information or parameters you think is needed in the figure?
Relevant answer
Answer
More precipitation, deposition, or corrosion occurs at pH X than at pH Y. Surface polish degrades faster at pH X.
At pH X, concentration fluctuates over time, while at pH Y, concentration increases steadily. The concentrations vary with depth, but the fluctuation patterns are similar.
  • asked a question related to Scientific Communication
Question
2 answers
Dear scientific community, I need to delate in a data frame derivated from satellite products (Copernicus program) some missing values (NA). There are several techniques to do this, but which is the best from your experience? I would add that I am using R studio for my data analysis.
Relevant answer
Answer
If your aim is to delete the rows where missing values (NA), then use simply the following function in R
na.omit(dataframe)
  • asked a question related to Scientific Communication
Question
1 answer
Hi scientific community,
I have defrosted (from -20ºC) one bottle of cRPMI (complete RPMI media) then I have prepared all the aliquots (10 mL) under sterile conditions and all of them have been preserved at -20ºC.
I have defrosted two aliquot one week after aliquoting and both are very pink (colour appearance). It could be by using an aliquots preservation at -20ºC after defrost?
All the opinions/experiences will be wellcome.
Thanks in advance.
Relevant answer
Answer
Yolanda Gimenez Molina Cool-season crops should be stored at colder temperatures (32 to 35°F), whereas warm-season crops should be stored at warmer temperatures (45 to 55°F).
  • asked a question related to Scientific Communication
Question
3 answers
Dear scientific community,
What is your view on adopting the Blockchain and Non-Fungible Token (NFT) technologies in Biological Sciences? and how it can transform the genome storage or genome bank (governments of many countries are planning)?
Also, how this technique can be adapted to the local level or, say at the hospital level, to store any particular portion of human DNA in the worst-case scenarios like accidents or any disasters.
Also is it possible to donate blood can be stored in the hospitals and it can be connected through the NFT and once the owner wants to sell it can (Anyhow the blood business is unethical but if it can be tokenised people might move more towards donating it, also the hospitals are making money out of taking blood freely)
Also, you can suggest on your behalf, what are the latest area (with respect to biological sciences) where these techniques can be applied.
Relevant answer
Answer
The discussion is about how the NFT and blockchain can be applied to the said area.
  • asked a question related to Scientific Communication
Question
8 answers
Gray literature vs. scientific literature
-What are the advantages and disadvantages of gray literature compared to scientific literature.
-What are the repositories that you know about gray literature.
-What is the importance of gray literature for developing countries
Gray literature is "materials and research produced by organizations outside of the traditional commercial or academic publishing and distribution channels. Common gray literature publication types include reports (annual, research, technical, project, etc.), working papers, government documents, white papers and evaluations"
Scientific literature "comprises scholarly publications that report original empirical and theoretical work in the natural and social sciences. Within an academic field, scientific literature is often referred to as the literature. Academic publishing is the process of contributing the results of one's research into the literature, which often requires a peer-review process".
Relevant answer
Answer
To me, the main advantage of gray literature is that it may contain information that is considered so "obvious" that it does not get mentioned in scientific literature. However, the lack of peer review makes me think twice sometimes.
The major disadvantage is that if I am looking for information about a very specific or specialised topic, that it will usually only be found in scientific literature.
  • asked a question related to Scientific Communication
Question
11 answers
People are searching for certainty in Science and that’s the opposite of what leads to scientific breakthroughs. How to deal with this?
Relevant answer
Answer
Skepticism is an important part of scientific progress, since Xenophanes and Democritus .The Greek word skepsis means investigation; by calling themselves skeptics, the ancient skeptics and Hellenic philosophers described themselves as investigators. Doubt is an essential part of the scientific measurement method to match data and real phenomena by experimental and empirical testing, with respect to select a 'working hypothesis', in terms of applying knowledge successfully and tech-know-logically.
  • asked a question related to Scientific Communication
Question
4 answers
Scientific articles published in esteemed newspapers hold many informations that can be of great value which often includes biodiversity documentation, sporadic incidents, demographic data and many more that are seldom being cited and eventually consign to oblivion.
Do you think that these datas, only those that are relevant and authentic, should be cited and a proper archive and citation protocol should be constituted.
Relevant answer
Answer
There is certainly a marketplace for making scientific content digestible by the public. Unfortunately, many quality newspapers don't accurately reference or link directly to quality research, generally you can find the original source but occasionally the true source can't be found.
  • asked a question related to Scientific Communication
Question
25 answers
Dear Academics,
Kindly could you comment here that how this Research Gate Academic Platform was important, beneficial and helpful for you to build up your academic life up to now.
was this helpful for changing your,
1. Citation number
2. Research Interest
3. Build up more connections in the academic world
4. Your knowledge
5. Recommending your research activities
Thank you and Best regards.
Relevant answer
Answer
Kindly see also the following useful RG link:
  • asked a question related to Scientific Communication
Question
38 answers
What kind of scientific research dominate in the field of Scientific research in the era of Industry 4.0?
Please, provide your suggestions for a question, problem or research thesis in the issues: Scientific research in the era of Industry 4.0.
Please reply.
I invite you to the discussion
Best wishes
Relevant answer
Answer
Industry 4.0 as component of the current context of the business:
"Impact of Industry 4.0 on Business Management Style".
  • asked a question related to Scientific Communication
Question
4 answers
Recently, there is a new trend in the scientific community is to publish on Preprint servers, but the International Code of Zoological Nomenclature does not seem to fit such a trend (or is not designed for such a trend). If anyone is familiar with this issue, could you please let me how taxonomists have to handle this trend?
Relevant answer
Answer
Hello Katsuyuki; I agree wholeheartedly with David. A species description in a preprint is not a valid species description. Citing such a preprint would only confuse an already cluttered literature. Get the paper properly published so that it can be cited by other workers who are interested in the systematics of your group. Best regards, Jim Des Lauriers
  • asked a question related to Scientific Communication
Question
5 answers
Differentiating Science from Pseudoscience is becoming a challenge at so many levels these days. How can we separate the two and acknowledge a grey area in between?
Relevant answer
Answer
The page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pseudoscience gives a rather good overview about the distinction between science and pseudoscience, about indicators of possible pseudoscience, and about the resons for it. For a discussion of the reasons, see also https://www.researchgate.net/post/What_is_the_explanation_for_the_appearance_of_some_people_who_believe_that_the_earth_is_not_round_and_that_man_has_not_reached_the_moon.
See also these discussions about astrology - for me as an astronomer it is hard to believe how many scientists believe in it:
  • asked a question related to Scientific Communication
Question
34 answers
I would be interested to hear from the scientific community regarding their thoughts on this fascinating subject.
  • asked a question related to Scientific Communication
Question
20 answers
  • the questionable behaviors and actions of some researchers and faculty members in the world of academia are gaining momentum. most of them in the forms of publications, (there might be more, but not In front of eyes)
  • we clearly see that many journals, even top ones allow their EDITORIAL BOARD MEMBERS publish astonishing number of articles in where they edit.
  • take it into consideration that journals are autonomous, outsiders can not ask the reasons
  • but yet an alarming issue is that if we seek the names of those people in other journals that they don't serve (in the same field) , we almost fail to find any articles from them...
  • how is it possible? what could be the value of such papers? how to trust them? what could be their aim(s)?
Relevant answer
Answer
Editorial board members should have the same rights like others. Excluding them from the right to publish in the journal they serve would reduce their possibilities to publish. The journals would not find board members if they "punished" them by a ban. Of course, their papers should be reviewed by independent researchers. I reviewed such a paper many years ago, and the paper of the board member was not published. This depends, however, on the ethical behavior of the editors.
  • asked a question related to Scientific Communication
Question
30 answers
There is probably no other science portal that would offer all the same functions for researchers as the Research Gate portal.
Do you agree with me on the above matter?
In the context of the above issues, I am asking you the following question:
Does the Research Gate research portal offer the most information services for researchers that researchers and scientists need?
Please reply
I invite you to the discussion
Thank you very much
Best wishes
Relevant answer
Answer
A bit too much of the results is presented on Researchgate with the lack of the backyard and preparation process for research. It could be good to see also the kitchen of the dinner of the researchers.
  • asked a question related to Scientific Communication
Question
6 answers
Hi guys,
Would someone share some posters used for scientific communication in the following discipline:
Wastewater
reuse of water
Water analysis
Water environmental etc.
Relevant answer
Answer
  • asked a question related to Scientific Communication
Question
5 answers
Can I publish a book out of my already published papers?
I mean, by gathering and compiling some of my related papers into a book form, without modifying them!
1- Would be any problem with that?
2- can you suggest a good place for that!
Please, share your experience and knowledge in this topic for the whole scientific community benefit :)
Many thanks for everyone in advance,
A.A.
Relevant answer
Answer
Yes, you can do so. But you will need permission from the copywrite holder. You can make a book proposal to a publisher. They usually have forms on their website to do so.
Good Luck in your publication.
  • asked a question related to Scientific Communication
Question
1 answer
Hello to all scientific community, I kindly request you very urgent help. Who kindly give me brief information how to differentiate the four stage of Tuta absoluta’s larvae (First instar, second instar, third instar and fourth instar)? How can we measure their lengthiness? As scientific procedure. Thank you for you cooperation
Relevant answer
Answer
Larvae complete 4 instars that are well-defined and are of different sizes and colors (Estay, 2000). Larvae are dorso-ventrally flattened and their color changes from creamy white to green during development. When larvae are ready to molt they stop eating and purge their stomach contents, causing their coloration to return to creamy white.
One more point that is you have to monitoring the moulting of each larvae. This could be done by keeping each larva in a single small pitre dish and try to find the exuvae
  • asked a question related to Scientific Communication
Question
5 answers
If you have a recommendation of someone and a summary of the importance of their contribution to science, I would like to learn of these great researchers.
I ask because I found out only recently that my very first research advisor, Dr. Bob Behringer, had passed. He was an amazing, personable figure in granular materials physics and his story is here: https://today.duke.edu/2018/07/physics-professor-robert-p-behringer-dies-69. I was recommending his research to a colleague who had a question about force chains and that's when we learned the news. He was only 69 but he had been a part of the Duke University community for nearly 50 years.
It was too late for my colleague to ask Dr. Behringer his question, but maybe this discussion will help raise awareness of some influential research from some great people. Maybe we can reach out to them with our questions before it is too late. And if it is too late because they have recently departed, their work will live on through those who know about their research.
Relevant answer
Answer
your idea is perfect. the world is full of these wonderful people that are expert on their works but I feel sorry that I can't become one of the student of them.
for everyone that works on seed topics, I'd like to introduce prof Gerhard Leubner in Royal Holloway, University of London who I have cheched his works for a long time and I love him by my heart .
  • asked a question related to Scientific Communication
Question
8 answers
Many scientists suggest that a good way to analyze the level of innovation in action, generate innovation in financial institutions, eg in banks, is conducting surveys among managers and department directors, departments in these institutions.
How should such surveys be carried out? What method of surveys is the most effective? Do online questionnaire forms are an effective instrument for carrying out surveys?
What other research techniques can be used to investigate the level of innovation in operation, generate innovation in financial institutions?
Please reply
Best wishes
Relevant answer
Answer
Dear Mohammed Jaafar Ali Alatabe,
Thanks and invite you to joint discussions on the subject of innovation in financial institutions.
Regards,
Dariusz Prokopowicz
  • asked a question related to Scientific Communication
Question
22 answers
What is important in building international research teams?
On what foundations should long-term scientific cooperation between scientists be developed?
Please reply
Best wishes
Relevant answer
Answer
In my opinion, the development of ICT and Industry 4.0 information technologies, the use of Internet remote communication, the increase in digitization and internationalization of communication processes taking place during the SARS-CoV-2 (Covid-19) coronavirus pandemic, the development of online social networks, e.g. the Research Gate portal increases the opportunities development of international cooperation in the world of science.
I invite you to the discussion,
Thank you very much,
Best regards,
Dariusz Prokopowicz
  • asked a question related to Scientific Communication
Question
5 answers
I have enjoyed listening to podcasts to learn about scientific communication, research methodology, peer review, open access, preprints, scientometrics, and other topics. I am interested if anyone has a podcast they like that discusses any of these topics. Here are some that I have listened to so far:
The Scholarly Kitchen Podcast
InformED (ISMPP)
Everything Hertz
Science Communication Journal Club Podcast
Thank you,
Rob
  • asked a question related to Scientific Communication
Question
6 answers
I've spend the last decade trying to articulate solutions to Big Questions in science,
particularly explaining why Relativity and Quantum Mechanics aren't hostile towards each other but rather misunderstood concepts.
I feel I have a good understanding of how the universe formed and evolved, what Gravity is, and several other topics that can be explained easily and simple.
It drives me crazy not knowing how to reach out to the scientific community and share ideas.
Journals and call for papers require fancy formats and equations that I just don't have. I just want to publish short, simple, explainations for problems in casual English.
Where do I do this?
Relevant answer
I wish I could remember the place where you can send the answers to question. I think what you do is pick or send the question or answer to this place. I think is more like a repository. Sorry for the inconvenience, if I remember I would write again.
  • asked a question related to Scientific Communication
Question
9 answers
What are or what should be the goals of scientific communication? Does it really work? Is its efficiency actually significant when compared to the results of science education and scientific literacy?
Relevant answer
Answer
Science intrinsically is a social activity (among other things). Thus communication is essential. But with the general public, can science mediation be more than propaganga? I sincerely hope so. But by seing how scientfic results are mobilised or handled by lambda citizens on social media, I'm a bit worried.
  • asked a question related to Scientific Communication
Question
7 answers
Why do reviewers always ask for TEM images for synthesized materials. For example a material like ZnO or Fe3O4. If the material has been synthesized by a known procedure which already exists in literature and the structure & morphology being already confirmed by XRD and SEM. What is the need of TEM. In a country like India, TEM images are very difficult to obtain. Unless there are some structural defects in the material, which can only conformed by TEM, I dont think TEM is an absolute necessity for writing a good paper. The scientific community must judge the paper based on quality of work, importance of the research and impact of the research on society and scientific domain. I dont believe that just by including a TEM image any paper becomes good. Many reviewers may not even know how to analyze a TEM image.
Relevant answer
Answer
Bcs it provides almost exact size at nanoscale and it is better technique to determine the size of materials at ultra nanoscale
  • asked a question related to Scientific Communication
Question
17 answers
I wonder if submitting in a special issue is better than submitting in a regular issue.
Relevant answer
Answer
You can submit/publish work in both special and regular issues. The important thing is, in any case, that you publish your work and that it is a magazine with some recognition.
  • asked a question related to Scientific Communication
Question
10 answers
Papers submitted to some journals are being openly accessible through research square even before acceptance. What does it mean from the scientific communication and ethics perspective?
Relevant answer
Answer
In a general perspective, this possibly seems to be a phase in transition to another system of scientific ”publishing”. Think of these present factors / problems first:
  • To make a manuscript available for anyone globally with internet access is not difficult. Anyone can do it. This is a big difference compared to the time of print distribution to university libraries.
  • The number of scientific wannabe-authors increases all the time, and there is a big lack of both reviewers and general readers. When more (reluctant) people are reviewing more papers, quality decreases. But new fake ”Publishers”try to deceive authors in this growing market and make them pay fees for nothing.
  • The earlier / present publishing process is painfully slow, so slow that results can become obsolete before publishing
  • Journals try to make money on authors and revewers freework by limiting the access for reading by fees , or by charging the author for this free access). This is not sustainable, and people feel it.
  • Aithors seem to read other papersvery shallowly, just to get something credible to cite. Some AI app will be able to provide citations for any crap manuscript very soon.
My personal guess is that a future system can work somewhat like wikipedia. Write first and publish your draft, an AI application checks plagiarism, form factors, language, citation correctness etc. When enough people have read and critically commented and the paper has been improved, it can get an ”OK” sign, as being scientifically sound and thereby citable as a scientific source. Some readers/reviewers may by then have the status of co-authors or contributors, depending on their contributing work. Or some other system will reward this work.
Some published draft manuscripts will gain no interest, no reads or comments or reviews - that manuscript will be archived /fade away within a year or two. This would be very good.
  • asked a question related to Scientific Communication
Question
12 answers
Dear RG Academics who Travel,
This is an important topic because many academics relish going to desirable places for conferences. My husband and I used to travel to scientific conferences but so much red tape is involved he and I are glad to attend mostly on video conferencing technologies (yes, like Zoom and others whose names I don't know. No intent to favor one or the other technology company)
It is good to remember that social bragging rights do not equal additions to knowledge (i.e., what exotic place one has traveled lately.). Yet, local economies are helped by all kinds of conferences and the money that they bring.
There are costs and benefits either way, so please share your ideas about continuing in-person conferences when there is little we cannot do via remote presentation, informal conferring and virtual "hallway" chatter.
Look look forward to your ideas.
Relevant answer
Answer
Good question related to all of academicians! Its true there is lot of codal formalities to get funding and visa processing time etc. I think face to face attending is better than online mode. As we can make new connections, friends, links in the field, visit different places, understand the work of other and many more. I was lucky to have chances to visit different places in the world. Currently lockdown stations shifted most of the academic activities as online mode. I hope situation will be better soon and we again have a chance.
  • asked a question related to Scientific Communication
Question
8 answers
I would appreciate the suggestion of the scientific community on this topic. Thank you so much.
Relevant answer
Answer
The effects of incentives, social norms, and employees' values on work performance
You can also read this article
  • asked a question related to Scientific Communication
Question
11 answers
In Academia, we have gotten used to dialogs like this one:
A- Look, that person over there, is very important, a genius.
B- Yes? Why?
A- Published in Science and Nature.
B- Ohh! And what about?
A- Have no idea …. But man! Science and Nature!... what a genius.
B- Yes…. What a genius.
The repercussion of a scientific idea, probably now more than ever, will depend on what journal the idea is published. It seems there are no alternatives. If you have a good idea, it must be published in a top-ranked journal. Otherwise, your idea, and you, are not perceived as good as you may think or deserve. Consciously or unconsciously, journals are perceived as something more relevant than the ideas they publish. They are perceived as labels of quality.
The higher the ranking of the journal you publish in, the better your idea (and you) will be celebrated by colleagues. That (weird, unjust, and even unethical) paradigm has been dominating the international scientific community for many years in Academia. But what is more important?: the journal, the idea, or the authors? There seems to be a great deal of confusion around that.
For many (most?) colleagues and institutions, counting the number of papers in top-ranked journals still is the best way to identify the best scientists that should be perceived as role models within the scientific community. Some weigh also the leading role of the authors in their papers, some weigh the number of citations received. But the critical factor seems to be always in what top-journal you have published and how many times you did it.
However, there are disciplines that seem to be outside this loop. Often, colleagues from the Social Sciences tell me they do not worry about international top-ranked journals as much as we (in Biological Sciences) do. I´m sure it doesn’t work the same in different countries, as I see some researchers from the Soc Sc frequently publishing in top-ranked journals.
So, do journals really determine what ideas will prevail over others? Is this problem properly addressed by the international scientific community? What alternatives do scientists have? Join the discussion and share your ideas!
Relevant answer
Answer
I'm probably misquoting, but this brings to mind for me something Wittgenstein said, I guess, to a student/colleague: 'we have to make our own oxygen'. For me, someone who has been in this game for a while, this means that my main goal is to be happy with my own work and not to worry about exactly where it is published. Sure, there is pleasure in getting in a top journal, but sometimes I'm equally proud of work that appears in local-small outlets. If you ever re-read your own work several years after publication, isn't it important that we don't cringe about what we have said, ie. we made an argument/contribution that still stands, or at least makes reasonable sense?
  • asked a question related to Scientific Communication
Question
6 answers
Dear scientific community,
What literature about political communication or social media, or political communication through social media can you advise me to read? Thank you very much.
Relevant answer
Answer
An Introduction to Political Communication by Brian McNair is a good book
  • asked a question related to Scientific Communication
Question
7 answers
Have you used the article summarizer Scholarcy https://www.scholarcy.com/? What was your experience with it? Can you tell me how accurate the summarized information is?
Thanks in advance for your answers!
Relevant answer
Answer
It is an application with the slogan "read less, learn more". This slogan is completely against the nature of the academy. I think it's good for lazy students to prepare homework, that's all. And maybe the app could be useful for non-academic uses, such as summarizing the news feed.
  • asked a question related to Scientific Communication
Question
3 answers
Hello everyone,
Hope you all are doing well in this global pandemic. Can you please tell me the expected month in 2021, when JCR Year: 2020 Selected Editions: SCIE,SSCI Selected Quartiles: data will be get updated?
Thanking you in anticipation.
Relevant answer
Answer
on Wednesday 30th June 2021
  • asked a question related to Scientific Communication
Question
43 answers
I would like to raise this question to the scientific community. Please provide your opinion and your arguments.
Relevant answer
Answer
Hi. Renewable energy resources as biofuel is good but if the electrical car use water as a fuel will be better . Electrical cell used to make electrolysis for water to produce hydrogen then the produced hydrogen is input for fuel cell to produce electrivcty and oxygen .
  • asked a question related to Scientific Communication
Question
12 answers
Hello scientific community
Do you noting the following:
[I note that when a new algorithms has been proposed, most of the researchers walk quickly to improve it and apply for solving the same and other problems. I ask now, so why the original algorithm if it suffer from weakness, why the need for a new algorithm if there are an existing one that solved the same problems, I understand if the new algorithm solved the unsolved problem so welcome, else why?]
Therefore, I ask, is the scientific community need a novel metaheuristic algorithms (MHs) rather than the existing.
I think, we need to organized the existing metaheuristic algorithms and mentioned the pros and cons for each one, the solved problems by each one.
The repeated algorithms must be disappear and the complex also.
The dependent algorithms must be disappeared.
We need to benchmark the MHs similar as the benchmark test suite.
Also, we need to determine the unsolved problems and if you would like to propose a novel algorithm so try to solve the unsolved problem else stop please.
Thanks and I wait for the reputable discussion
Relevant answer
Answer
The last few decades have seen the introduction of a large number of "novel" metaheuristics inspired by different natural and social phenomena. While metaphors have been useful inspirations, I believe this development has taken the field a step backwards, rather than forwards. When the metaphors are stripped away, are these algorithms different in their behaviour? Instead of more new methods, we need more critical evaluation of established methods to reveal their underlying mechanics.
  • asked a question related to Scientific Communication
Question
7 answers
  • First of all, in the Nature Index (±82), all the journals are not Nature journals .
  • Secondly, how we differentiate Natural Index journals from Web of Science and Scopus index journals?
Relevant answer
Answer
  • asked a question related to Scientific Communication
Question
5 answers
Recently, citizen science projects take a big part of the scientific community all around the World. Thus, non-scientists can meaningfully contribute to scientific research. Is it a good thing?
Relevant answer
Answer
The term Citizen Science is an arrogantly dismissive label assigned to non academics by academics. There are many non academic people doing very good science as an adjunct to their careers. The work should be treated as any other science, reviewed and utilized based on it's process and merits rather than the author's affiliation.
  • asked a question related to Scientific Communication
Question
29 answers
For relevant background to this question, readers are encouraged to see my RG project (and Project Log) titled "Healthy Children". A paradigm-shift is urgently needed. Something about the current pandemic is different from prior "outbreaks". What is different about this one? We really do need some answers to this question, ASAP. The status quo is unsustainable. The "new normal" is intolerable. An unfettered, uncensored discussion by the scientific community is urtgently called for.
Relevant answer
Answer
Strategies in the control of an outbreak are screening, containment (or suppression), and mitigation. Screening is done with a device such as a thermometer to detect the elevated body temperature associated with fevers caused by the coronavirus. Containment is undertaken in the early stages of the outbreak and aims to trace and isolate those infected as well as introduce other measures to stop the disease from spreading. When it is no longer possible to contain the disease, efforts then move to the mitigation stage: measures are taken to slow the spread and mitigate its effects on the healthcare system and society. A combination of both containment and mitigation measures may be undertaken at the same time. Suppression requires more extreme measures so as to reverse the pandemic by reducing the basic reproduction number to less than 1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COVID-19_pandemic#:~:text=Strategies%20in%20the%20control%20of,1.%5B187%5D
  • asked a question related to Scientific Communication
Question
4 answers
What are some of the international/national travel grants that are available for Master's (M.Tech) students to present research in conferences/seminars/workshops/symposiums. Any suggestions regarding this will be greatly appreciated.
Thank You in advance.
Relevant answer
Answer
ICSSR,DST
  • asked a question related to Scientific Communication
Question
4 answers
Indices like NDVI, NDBI are widely adopted by the scientific community to identify distinct land cover types. Prominently, Otsu's threshold estimation is adopted. But how do we select the lower and upper limits of the threshold for a given index (manually) and are there other better techniques that can be adopted?
Relevant answer
Answer
Ashish Mishra K-means can be more efficiently employed.
Good luck
  • asked a question related to Scientific Communication
Question
17 answers
In my opinion, scientific research is the most important source of emerging innovations, new technological solutions and improvements in production processes that contribute to civilization development and technological progress, and also constitute an important source of added value of production processes in the economies of developed countries in knowledge-based economies. In the future, research should play a particularly important role in knowledge-based economies. For example, research should generate innovative ecological and new renewable energy solutions in the future to reduce adverse climate change resulting from a progressive global warming process.
In view of the above, I would like to ask you: Can research be considered as the most important factor generating technological value added in knowledge-based economies?
Please, answer, comments. I invite you to the discussion.
Relevant answer
Answer
If the answer to the above questions is in the affirmative, then along with the growing importance of technology, information and knowledge in production processes and in the issue of problem solving, externalities of civilization development, etc., there should be a gradual increase in the importance of research aimed at creating new technological solutions and innovations. As a result, the importance of allocating funds for research and development, i.e. the issue of financing this research, may also increase.
Best regards,
Dariusz Prokopowicz
  • asked a question related to Scientific Communication
Question
1 answer
Hello all,
I would greatly appreciate your comments about our abstract and poster #2775 presented at 52 Lunar and Planetary Science Conference held in Houston, in March 15-19 this year.
We presented the first results of our examinations of the unusual achondrite-like find, most likely the meteorite from early watery Mars. We found an unusual 15 mm large fossil in it that according to our preliminary micro-Raman spectroscopy examinations contains carbon in nano-diamond particles characteristic for meteorites exposed to huge impact shocks. This and our other data so far are - in our understanding so unusual - that they should deserve more interest from scientific community. In fact, Is it possible that this find contains the long searched for traces of extraterrestrial early life?
Would anybody be interested in helping us to answer this question?
Jerzy (George) Sawicki
Victoria, BC, Canada
Relevant answer
Answer
Dear Sawiki,
ideally, if the meteorite comes form Mars, it should be possible to find some traces of life (if, of course, there was life in Mars in the first place).
In practice, if it is a projectile from the surface, it is really improbable that any fossiles could survive the first impact, since the rocks are destroyed and fused together in that moment.
About the presence of evolved life on Mars, I find it also really improbable: like I wrote in my little paper (you can find it on my profile page) evolved life is really difficult to achieve, since it requires great stability of the environment for millions of years which Mars did not have in its history (as far as we know).
Hope my comment has responded your questions, regards
  • asked a question related to Scientific Communication
Question
6 answers
Given the recent issues by the Astrazeneca vaccine, how can the scientific community ensure that there is transparency in the test process? What sort of sampling should be done and how can mobile technologies and artificial intelligence play a part?
Relevant answer
Answer
Dear Dr. Chandra!
You hit a key point. Transparency of testing processes must become better and AI has a significant role:
1) Nayak, J., Naik, B., Dinesh, P. et al. Intelligent system for COVID-19 prognosis: a state-of-the-art survey. Appl Intell (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10489-020-02102-7 Open access:
2) Zhang, D., Liu, X., Shao, M. et al. The value of artificial intelligence and imaging diagnosis in the fight against COVID-19. Pers Ubiquit Comput (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00779-021-01522-7 Open access:
3) Guillaume Chassagnon et al. (2021). AI-driven quantification, staging and outcome prediction of COVID-19 pneumonia, Medical Image Analysis, Volume 67, January 2021, Available at:
Yours sincerely, Bulcsu Szekely
  • asked a question related to Scientific Communication
Question
97 answers
Einstein's theory of relativity is now accepted by the scientific community. In 2020, Penrose was awarded one half of the Nobel Prize in Physics for the discovery that black hole formation is a robust prediction of the general theory of relativity.
Relevant answer
Answer
The idea that the theories of relativity or even Newton;s faulty theory of extraterrestrial gravity (as discussed in the reference above) are essential) for GPS is pure propaganda. It is the same propaganda regarding the navigation of other space exploration vehicles; which use onboard intelligent and/or remote control systems, without any systematic use of theories of gravity (GR included), like modern self-driving cars on earth.. Everything is done by the brilliant engineers, but theoretical physicists insist on their relevance and get engaged unnecessarily for scholastic exercise to big-up the theories of relativity.
The following reference shows a publication (as far back as 1997), by two engineers, who were involved in the early development of GPS.
H.F. Fliegel and R. S. DiEsposti of the GPS Joint Program Office of the Aerospace Corporation conclude:
“Except for the leading γ [gamma] factor [in their final equation], it is the same formula derived in classical physics for the signal travel time from the GPS satellite to the ground station. As we have shown, introducing the γ factor makes a change of only 2 or 3 millimeters to the classical result. In short there are no ‘missing relativity terms.’ They cancel out.” General Relativity Theory is not needed."
And the following is what our shameless mega-propagandist theoretical physicists spout out:
Einstein's Relativity - YouTube
  • asked a question related to Scientific Communication
Question
2 answers
(Submitted to Science Magazine) Seven new Features of Black Holes impart a great Risk on the LHC
Otto E. Rossler
Division of Theoretical Chemistry, University of Tubingen, Morgenstelle 8, 72076 Tubingen, F.R.G.
Abstract
The most recent chapter in the fascinating story of black holes is offered. Johnny Wheeler’s witty profundity in the footsteps of his mentor Einstein still shines through. The “no-hair theorem“ is clipped from 3 to 2 surviving “hairs“ (mass and angular momentum remain, charge goes). And an unbelievable oversight of the scientific community maintained for 7 decades is exposed: an infinite slow-down of infalling astronaut clocks so that horizons become effectively unreachable. The other five new features are: nonevaporation; threshold reduction; exclusive risk to earth; quantum protection of neutron stars; and exponential growth inside matter. An attempt at falsifying this 7-link chain in at least one element is encouraged as a precondition for the Large Hadron Collider’s planned second start.
(April 17, 2009, revised May 16, 2009)
Oct. 12, 2019
Relevant answer
Answer
Congrats. Big achievement.
  • asked a question related to Scientific Communication
Question
4 answers
I am looking for advice concerning a (supposedly) known practical issue : article overloads. While doing my PhD I was convinced that everything who went through publication was worth reading and understanding. My opinion as evolved since then for very practical consideration : lack of time to read biblio and absolute necessity to "pre-screen" something before deciding if it's worth reading or not.
Concerning scientific paper, the prescreening can be tricky. Since the format is very standardized as well as the wording (nothings sounds more like a paper than a paper), I often end up reading half a dozen page on a paper, annotates parts, spend time... before deciding I shouldn't spend time on it.
Do you have some "tricks" to share in order to lower that waste of time? While these "tricks" might be completely non-scientific of course, I still would enjoy them
Relevant answer
Answer
If you are reading the prior work just for your literature review, you don't have to meticulously read them as if you are reviewing them as a referee. However, if you identify some errors or shortcomings, take a note of them, perhaps you might end up with another paper idea from them. You just have to identify what is different compared to your paper and how your paper is an improvement or a different but important paper looking from another aspect, etc. If it is highly related to your paper, and you need to be very specific to convince the readers that your contribution is significant, then you should read it very carefully. If you need to get a general idea about the area, for a potential research, then you will need to read the most important (highly cited) and early work on that subject very carefully. You also need to read the most recent work, to be up-to-date on the subject. Your reading of the earliest, the most influential and the latest papers on the subject will lead to more papers to read, to guide your literature review and to improve your understanding of the state of the art in the area.
  • asked a question related to Scientific Communication
Question
5 answers
Nature Letters has historically been a "safety valve" for scientific publication in that it provided a way for a Nature Editor to allow the publication of short and possibly controversial pieces that might potentially be important, but that would find it difficult or impossible to pass normal peer-review.
In October 2019 Nature announced that the suspension of the Letters section was now a permanent feature of the journal's new redesign.
  • " ... From now on, all our research content will also be published in the 'Article' format; the shorter, 'Letter' format has been retired. "
This is, obviously, the end of an era. Was the format redundant? Did the science community not produce enough interesting but controversial material to keep it going? Are scientists today more conservative than they used to be and less willing to take risks with their reputations? Does this leave the scientific community without a respected "official" channel for communicating controversial ideas and results?
Relevant answer
Answer
The highest-profile "Nature Letter" I can think of (for the late Twentieth Century) is Stephen Hawking's "Black hole explosions?" letter, in 1974:
Hawking's letter outlined the concept of Hawking radiation, an idea that was unable to be published in mainstream journals as a paper, as it directly contradicted a key prediction of Einstein's general theory that was assumed to have been proved beyond reasonable doubt.
When Hawking gave a talk on the idea, the meeting was called to a premature halt by the organiser, John Taylor, who famously walked out declaring the idea to be rubbish. Taylor also supposedly advised Nature not to publish the letter ... but Nature's Editor decided to print it anyway, and the rest is history.
With Hawking's argument now published in a high-profile journal, a number of theorists then set to work identifying why the argument was wrong ... and found to their surprise that it wasn't.
How big a part did Nature Letters play in the uptake of Hawking's idea?
If Hawking hadn't been able to publish in a major journal, would the idea still have "broken through", or would it have risked disappearing without a trace?
  • asked a question related to Scientific Communication
Question
4 answers
Call for collaboration!
Recently we uploaded the whole genome sequences of four potential wheat blast biocontrol bacteria in the Open Wheat Blast Website (please see at http://s620715531.websitehome.co.uk/owb/?page_id=828)
We expect participation global scientific community in elucidating the underlying molecular mechanisms of the plant probiotics to control wheat blast. Our ultimate goal is to develop and deploy environmentally safe biocontrol agent against fearsome wheat blast in Bangladesh and beyond.
Please share this message with the relevant researchers in your network.
Relevant answer
Answer
It was a nice project you did a pretty good job! Congratulations!!!
  • asked a question related to Scientific Communication
Question
10 answers
So many approaches being used by researcher for the advancement of nutritional profiling in pulse crop, however, transgenic approach as it known for sustainable basis for alleviating malnutrition from the world not yet been approved and not yet to develop transgenic crops in pulse under biofortification. Lets share your views here for the benefiting of scientific community.
Relevant answer
Answer
Manju Lata Mishra Thank u madam for showing your interest on this topic
  • asked a question related to Scientific Communication
Question
13 answers
Dear Colleagues, I hope someone can provide some answer :
I recently had notified by Research Gate that ELSEVIER editorial did notified them that they needed to take one Scientific Article I had on my Research Items down, due to violation of ELSEVIER's Copyright.
This article was published on the Journal "Nano Energy", of ELSEVIER's, and I appear as the first autor.
Is there a way to keep one of this articles on your RG Items without infringing the Copyrights of ELSEVIER ?
Can I try to upload it again? This time under the "Private" mode (not open sharing, but via request)
Or it's better to leave the matter alone? Meaning that all ELSEVIER's editorial articles cannot be shared freely on Research Gate ?
Thank You! Best Regards !
Relevant answer
Answer
inerestibg situation, very actually in modern time. answers will be useful to many researchers
  • asked a question related to Scientific Communication
Question
66 answers
Yes, in my country, the Scopus indexing base is considered one of the most important. The Scopus database is recognized as the main scientific database for the indexation of scientific publications characterized by high citation. However, on a global scale, the bases of indexing scientific publications recognized in various countries by various centers and scientific institutions are at least a dozen or so. However, these various indexing bases are not usually fully comparable, they are functionally differentiated and thanks to that they are only partially substitutable, but more often they are complementary. The question of complementarity should be developed. Then it will serve the development of scientific research and international cooperation of scientific communities.
In view of the above, I am asking you with the following question: Is the Scopus database recognized in your country as the main database for the indexation of scientific publications?
And if not the Scopus database, which other database of publications and scientific journals is considered the most important in your country?
Do you agree with me on the above matter?
What do you think about this topic?
Please reply.
I invite you to discussion and scientific cooperation.
Thank you very much.
Best wishes.
Dariusz Prokopowicz
Relevant answer
Answer
Dear Dr. Dariusz Prokopowicz , I hold similar views - Dr. Avishag Gordon.
In India, the University (where I work) and many other Universities started seriously considering the Scopus index for Ph.D thesis submission ( 2 articles in scopus indexed journals), promotion (computing scores), and research grants (to assess quality of research undertaken so far) and Ph.D guideship (atleast 2 in scopus or SCI or SSCI)....
So, the point is Scopus is gaining acceptance/importance but there are other indexes too...considered equally important.
Warm regards Yoganandan G
  • asked a question related to Scientific Communication
Question
11 answers
I am interested in publishing a recent scientific study (brief report) that may have some political ramifications. I am searching for a non-peer reviewed journal or publication platform. This study will benefit the general public as much as the scientific community.
Relevant answer
Answer
Recently we submitted a manuscript with some criticism of the often applied "cherry-picking" strategy in terms of highly-resolved microscopic images. The first four of five journals directly rejected it as "not interesting" - finally it was published in Sci. Rep., and we got several mails from colleagues who agreed and stated that they had published something similar, wanted to do so or just were happy that somebody mentioned this problem.
In other words - if you address a critical topic, it may be not so easy to publish your manuscript in a good journal, but it's worth trying it. If you publish it "somewhere", it will simply not be read by others.