Collection

Epistemics

How an AI evidence record preserves why two peer-review committees disagreed

Peer review's central weakness is not a suspicion. It is one of the best-measured facts about scientific publishing, measured by the field most capable of measuring it, on itself, twice. In 2014 the NIPS programme chairs — Corinna Cortes

the whole object this page is drawn from, as JSON · Open JSON

{
  "schema": "page/1",
  "id": "type:epistemics",
  "layout": "collection",
  "kind": "Collection",
  "status": "published",
  "title": "Epistemics",
  "summary": "",
  "query": {
    "kind": "epistemics"
  },
  "version": "e7f721e09197c6e7e220fad9887e522a8439a0f4041b6b5e6a6827e3c5edfeda"
}