- #1
BWV
- 1,665
- 2,009
Click For Summary
Discussion Overview
The discussion revolves around a paper with nearly 9000 authors, exploring the implications of such a large author list, the coordination required, and the criteria for authorship in collaborative scientific work. Participants engage in a mix of humor, speculation, and critique regarding the authorship and content of the paper.
Discussion Character
- Debate/contested
- Conceptual clarification
- Exploratory
Main Points Raised
- One participant expresses curiosity about how coordination among 8778 authors was achieved.
- Another humorously suggests the possibility of a "flash mob" at a physics convention contributing to the author count.
- A participant notes the word count of the paper, suggesting a ratio of about one word per author, excluding the lengthy author list.
- There is speculation that the use of the Large Hadron Collider (LHC) may lead to broad authorship, as anyone who contributed to its operation could be listed as an author.
- One participant questions the accuracy of the author count, suggesting it should be between 3000-4000, and asks for clarification on which authors may not have contributed.
- A comment implies that mathematicians could learn from the situation, hinting at differences in authorship norms between fields.
- Another participant humorously names specific authors, suggesting they may not have contributed meaningfully to the paper.
- There is a suggestion that a distinction between contributors and authors might be beneficial given the large number of names.
- A participant mentions that the paper is not peer-reviewed and humorously notes the exclusion of an author who is upset about being left out.
Areas of Agreement / Disagreement
Participants express a range of opinions about the implications of having so many authors, with some questioning the validity of the author count and others speculating on the criteria for authorship. There is no consensus on the appropriateness of the authorship model or the quality of contributions.
Contextual Notes
Participants express uncertainty regarding the criteria for authorship in large collaborations and the implications of such practices on scientific credibility. The discussion reflects differing views on the significance of authorship in relation to contribution.
- #2
berkeman
Admin
- 69,407
- 24,780
Flash mob at a Physics convention?
- #3
jack action
Science Advisor
- 3,557
- 9,920
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
- 1,592
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
- 35,005
- 21,707
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
- 1,277
- 1,078
mathematicians have something to learn
- #7
Office_Shredder
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
- 5,706
- 1,592
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
- 3,690
- 5,854
Brian Cox is missingOffice_Shredder said:
- #9
BWV
- 1,665
- 2,009
Which surname - Aad or Zwalinski - would be better for a physics career?
- #10
Rive
Science Advisor
- 3,344
- 2,905
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
- 1,665
- 2,009
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: