- #1
BWV
- 1,633
- 1,991
Click For Summary
SUMMARY
The discussion centers on a paper with 8,778 authors, highlighting the challenges of author coordination in large collaborative projects. Participants noted that the paper contains approximately 10,000 words, resulting in an average of one word per author, excluding the extensive author list. The conversation also touches on the implications of including all contributors to the Large Hadron Collider (LHC) as authors, raising questions about the validity of such extensive authorship. Suggestions were made to differentiate between contributors and authors to enhance clarity.
PREREQUISITES- Understanding of collaborative research practices in physics
- Familiarity with the Large Hadron Collider (LHC) and its contributors
- Knowledge of academic authorship conventions
- Awareness of peer review processes in scientific publishing
- Research the implications of large author lists in scientific papers
- Explore best practices for author contribution disclosures in academic publishing
- Investigate the role of the Large Hadron Collider in modern physics research
- Learn about the peer review process and its importance in validating research
Researchers, physicists, and academic publishers interested in the dynamics of authorship in collaborative scientific projects.
- #2
berkeman
Admin
- 69,327
- 24,621
Flash mob at a Physics convention?
- #3
jack action
Science Advisor
- 3,553
- 9,895
Fun fact: There are about 10 000 words in the paper, so around 1 word per author. That is not counting the list of authors at the end: It is just as long as the paper itself so then we have 2 words per author!
- #4
Office_Shredder
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
- 5,706
- 1,590
I assume the problem is it uses the lhc, which means anyone who contributed to running it becomes an author.
- #5
Vanadium 50
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Education Advisor
Gold Member
Dearly Missed
- 35,004
- 21,705
A. Where did you get that number? It should eb 3000-4000.
B. Which author or authors do you think did not contribute?
B. Which author or authors do you think did not contribute?
- #6
wrobel
Science Advisor
- 1,245
- 1,051
mathematicians have something to learn
- #7
Office_Shredder
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
- 5,706
- 1,590
Francesco Costanza. If he's anything like his brother George he's just coasting on the work of others.Vanadium 50 said:
- #8
pinball1970
Gold Member
2025 Award
- 3,659
- 5,795
Brian Cox is missingOffice_Shredder said:
- #9
BWV
- 1,633
- 1,991
Which surname - Aad or Zwalinski - would be better for a physics career?
- #10
Rive
Science Advisor
- 3,331
- 2,895
Maybe time to have a list of contributors and a list of authorsOffice_Shredder said:
Thousands of authors... Nice piece of phone directory, I guess
Ps.: well, that's actually not exactly a joke... Sometimes what you need is just a list of names possibly working in a specific field of study. But thousands of names - ugh
- #11
BWV
- 1,633
- 1,991
Unfortunately the paper is not peer-reviewed - they were all listed as co-authors except that one guy nobody likes who got left out and he is too pissed to read the paper
Last edited:
Similar threads
- · Replies 1 ·
- · Replies 3 ·
- · Replies 54 ·
- · Replies 2 ·
- · Replies 30 ·
Graduate
RIP Chen Ning Yang (1922-2025)
- · Replies 6 ·
- · Replies 17 ·
Graduate
Using AI to evaluate white papers?
- · Replies 42 ·
- · Replies 95 ·
- · Replies 3 ·