Entries Tagged 'Science' ↓

3 years of investigation confirmed the allegation raised by his research assistants in the lab. Can’t believe such a blunt one. I guess the professor is in a great pressure, or else how to explain this?

Read at The Chronicles of Higher Education, NYT, Science, and USA Today.

Via Arts and Letters Daily

I love this.

Mary Roach: 10 things you didn’t know about orgasm

Read more on New Scientist: The comedy circuit: When your brain gets the joke.

Well, maybe in the eyes of psychologists everything is complicated.

By the way, you may like this in the morning.

I know scholarpedia quite a few times ago. But I forget to mention it on this blog. It is more like a encyclopedia full of reviews, and the reviewers are too great to be missed (see this page). Although this site is far from complete, entries are too fewer when compared with Wikipedia, I still suggest everyone check this site when you are looking for some academic information. The quality of the entries is better than that of Wikipedia.

I don’t know the idea of the peer-review process of PLOS One until I saw this comic on PHD Comics (you might need “something” to view this site and the comic above if you’re in China). And on PLOS One’s site, it is said that “PLoS ONE will rigorously peer-review your submissions and publish all papers that are judged to be technically sound”, and they won’t make a decision on a paper based on its “interestness”. If this is the case then the possible impact of the journal on science might be questionable as the quality of the papers published on the journal could be vastly different, which could lead to a downturn for the willingness of people to submit their possible high-impact papers to the journal especially as you need to pay for the paper to be published and in case that this journal doesn’t have an IF.

A new search engine emerges. Pubget offers the most important missing feature of PubMed, gets the PDFs of papers while searching.

“It planned to circulate the first beams 10th September 2008. First collisions at high energy are expected about a month later with the first results from the experiments soon after.” From the official site.

Let’s wait and see the result. And don’t forget your towel.

Everyone now cares more about the notorious Impact Factor made by ISI in the academic field.  It most often heard when somebody publish a paper:”How much is the impact factor of the journal?”.  Yeah, people don’t care much whether researchers in your field ever read the journal or not, but how high IF can be.  And hence the journals are also in the panic of get high IF.  Then a lot of journals questioned the method ISI used, but nothing change.  Recently, people at Rockefeller University Press decided to buy the database and calculate the IF by themselves.  The formula used by ISI to calculate IF is far too simple, but they couldn’t get it right: people of RUP can’t calculate the IFs as ISI stated even when ISI sent them another version of the database.  Read the story by following the links below(all need no subscription):Show me the data ISI’s replyRUP’s reply to ISI’s