Richard Wynne

Founder Rescognito. Squash at MIT.

[Richard Wynne @RichardCDW]

As a data scientist you should be alarmed that the #ORCID ID is hand keyed in this interface screenshot rather than validated through an API.

[ROR community (inactive Nov 2024) @ResearchOrgs]

"I’m a data scientist, so I love that. It’s great to have that kind of information so that people like me can do some cool stuff that you wouldn’t be able to do otherwise." Thus quoth Michael Parkin in our latest case study on how Europe PMC uses ROR: https://t.co/oS2SKwbKKT

[Ruben Dario Palacio, Ph.D. @rdpalacio]

I have tried many academic writing tools over the years.

My favorite so far is @teampaperpal.

It’s an AI-based grammar assistant that has been trained with millions of academic texts - and this makes all the difference.

Here are some of its best features ⬇️

[Richard Wynne @RichardCDW]

@ CSE generative AI session in Toronto #csetoronto - what do we think of applications like this: "Reference-free and cost-effective automated cell type annotation with GPT-4 in single-cell RNA-seq analysis" ?https://t.co/Onh0HsvWyz

[Richard Wynne @RichardCDW]

At #CSE2023 #CSEToronto starting today ? Come and have a conversation with #rescognito about opportunities for author engagement.

[Richard Wynne @RichardCDW]

As journals/publishers try to understand the implications of Chat, this is an interesting example

[Simona Cristea @simocristea]

Only a matter of time before a paper formalized this exercise:

Automated #scRNAseq cell type annotation with GPT4, evaluated across five datasets, 100s of tissues & cell types, human and mouse.

A🧵below with my thoughts on how such tools will change how #Bioinformatics is done.

[Richard Wynne @RichardCDW]

..and yet here we are in 2023 and the majority of authors in scholarly manuscripts are STILL only identified by valueless text strings rather than by authenticated PIDs (#ORCID). #STMAnnualUS journals - time is running out to get real about how you add value..

[Richard Wynne @RichardCDW]

40% is OA - #STMAnnualUS - must be having a significant impact on economics of subscription journals....Time to think hard about the real purpose of research journals..

[Rachel Scheer @racheljscheer]

Going for the gold! My @ClarivateAG colleague Josh Schnell is presenting on open access trends and citation impacts #STMAnnualUS

[Richard Wynne @RichardCDW]

For centuries research publishing has been content-centric. It’s about to become profoundly people-centric!

If you’d like to learn more, please arrange to meet Rescognito at: #CSE2023 (Toronto – April 29-May 2) or #SSP2023 (Portland OR, May 31 – June 2).

[Richard Wynne @RichardCDW]

@kaveh1000 @acochran12733 @SusanWillner @NISOInfo @contrib_roles I'd say more of an opportunity than a problem for journals. #rescognito can be used for CRediT, reviewer recognition with own granular terms.

[Richard Wynne @RichardCDW]

What’s the cost of each scholarly manuscript retraction? $782,586

https://t.co/tYwup0MwdT

[Richard Wynne @RichardCDW]

If you are a US-based researcher, please consider completing this brief survey to help Cactus understand your needs and priorities:

https://t.co/TsYFyZVyNG

[Richard Wynne @RichardCDW]

@joshmnicholson That's why the research incentive system should focus on process not just outcomes

[Richard Wynne @RichardCDW]

Yes - but research funders are happy counting citations as a "measure" of the impact of their research investments so sadly this is not going to change

[Alice Meadows 🇺🇦 @alicejmeadows]

The root problem for scholarly publishing/communications is the academic reward & incentive system says @dirnagl #APE23

[Richard Wynne @RichardCDW]

@PSAWorldTour are you doing to push back on Justice Gorsuch repeatedly trashing squash in recent #scotus oral arguments https://t.co/O3Wqt22hzd and https://t.co/DAw0ROpVhj ?

[Richard Wynne @RichardCDW]

😂...is this from STM 2012?

[Richard Wynne @RichardCDW]

@cshperspectives If your question is about chess cheating: https://t.co/vtzZebJzdO

[Richard Wynne @RichardCDW]

@mehmanib @Mario_Malicki Does this suggest that the true purpose of peer review is the catch the rare cases of "really wrong" papers? If so, could this be achieved more efficiently with in-house editors rather than volunteer peer reviewers? #prc9

[Richard Wynne @RichardCDW]

@EikoFried @aarontay @robinnkok Most researchers benefit from public funds and in their professional capacity act as "semi public" figures. Should their professional identify be subject to the same privacy considerations as private individuals?

[Kaveh Bazargan @kaveh1000]

ResearchGate must take down Elsevier articles, court rules https://t.co/KK5Nf1CMTu