Insights Blog
-- Browse All Articles --
Physics Articles
Physics Tutorials
Physics Guides
Physics FAQ
Math Articles
Math Tutorials
Math Guides
Math FAQ
Education Articles
Education Guides
Bio/Chem Articles
Technology Guides
Computer Science Tutorials
Forums
Trending
Featured Threads
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
More options
Contact us
Close Menu
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Forums
The Lounge
General Discussion
Collaborative Science: The Benefits and Challenges of Large-Scale Experiments
Reply to thread
Message
[QUOTE="Vanadium 50, post: 6391653, member: 110252"] I don't think that's a function of number of authors. It's a function of specialization. I can point you at some few-author papers that are just as hard to read. Also, there is information in the number of authors that is not captured by "lots". In 2001 a major collaboration published an unexpected (and ultimately unreproduced) result. 460 authors signed that paper. But other papers around this time had around 490. So 30 people were unconvinced enough to take the drastic step of asking to have their names removed from that paper. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Post reply
Forums
The Lounge
General Discussion
Collaborative Science: The Benefits and Challenges of Large-Scale Experiments
Back
Top