AI Reviews Might Beat Human Peer Reviews https://t.co/4hrYa0acqp
A limited demonstration that AI reviews can do the job of human reviewers at improving papers. Deciding what to publish still needs an accountable editor with human reviewers they trust.
I wrote this morning in the UVA AI Exchange newsletter about Claude Code’s new code modernization plugin, rewrites in #bioinformatics, and the fact that you can just build stuff now https://t.co/RJoPA66gwL
Very good essay. You can read it in 5 minutes. I wrote some of my own thoughts on this over the weekend.
What Counts as Impact? https://t.co/Pz8P0agYwa
Some of my thoughts about the surge in AI-generated papers, why this feels like a completely new kind of problem, and what this means for how we evaluate science in biology.
Out now in PLOS Biology:
https://t.co/FNV3L5My72
The Tidyomics Ecosystem https://t.co/UmYulwf49P An introduction to the tidyomics ecosystem, including principles, core packages, publications, and community resources for tidy omic analysis. #Rstats