4 ms·

Quantifying the evolution of individual scientific impact

22 points by yarapavan 10y ago

croon 10y ago
TLDR; No.
- emsy 10y ago
  Betteridge's law of headlines
  - ashryan 10y ago
    For those who have never heard of it: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Betteridge%27s_law_of_headlines https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Betteridge%27s_law_of_headli... It's meant to be humorous, but it's surprisingly accurate for many question headlines.
codeonfire 10y ago
Still barely eligible for a Fields medal, although I will have to work fast. Not eligible for moronic 20 under 20.
- biofox 10y ago
  20 under 20 should be countered by someone funding 50 over 50. Disrupt the SV age bias by taking 50 experienced professionals, and giving them the freedom and resources to do whatever they like.
grabcocque 10y ago
I was born too old to be brilliant.
MichailP 10y ago
I don't like when the idea is taken to extreme and parents force their kids to get as far as possible as young as possible. For example young pop stars competitions and similar. After all brilliant people don't always get the credit they deserve during their lifetime, e.g Tesla (died alone in hotel room talking to pigeons), Mozart (buried in unmarked grave), Lavoisier (executed in French revolution), list goes on and on
achow 10y ago
The linked article seems to be misleading on the true purpose of the research. The source: http://science.sciencemag.org/content/354/6312/aaf5239 http://science.sciencemag.org/content/354/6312/aaf5239 From the source: The random-impact rule allows us to develop a quantitative model, which systematically untangles the role of productivity and luck in each scientific career. The model predicts that truly high-impact discoveries require a combination of high Q and luck (p) and that increased productivity alone cannot substantially enhance the chance of a very high impact work. (Paraphrased) Where Q = Capability of scientist and potential impact of the chosen problem.
- sctb 10y ago
  Thanks, we had updated the link from https://keithsawyer.wordpress.com/2016/11/22/are-you-too-old-to-be-brilliant/ https://keithsawyer.wordpress.com/2016/11/22/are-you-too-old... a little while ago.
cvarjas 10y ago
PDF available from one of the authors: http://www.dashunwang.com/pdf/Sinatra2016-Science.pdf http://www.dashunwang.com/pdf/Sinatra2016-Science.pdf

22 points by yarapavan 10y ago

croon 10y ago

TLDR; No.

emsy 10y ago
Betteridge's law of headlines
- ashryan 10y ago
  For those who have never heard of it: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Betteridge%27s_law_of_headlines https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Betteridge%27s_law_of_headli... It's meant to be humorous, but it's surprisingly accurate for many question headlines.

codeonfire 10y ago

Still barely eligible for a Fields medal, although I will have to work fast. Not eligible for moronic 20 under 20.

biofox 10y ago
20 under 20 should be countered by someone funding 50 over 50. Disrupt the SV age bias by taking 50 experienced professionals, and giving them the freedom and resources to do whatever they like.

grabcocque 10y ago

I was born too old to be brilliant.

MichailP 10y ago

I don't like when the idea is taken to extreme and parents force their kids to get as far as possible as young as possible. For example young pop stars competitions and similar. After all brilliant people don't always get the credit they deserve during their lifetime, e.g Tesla (died alone in hotel room talking to pigeons), Mozart (buried in unmarked grave), Lavoisier (executed in French revolution), list goes on and on

achow 10y ago

The linked article seems to be misleading on the true purpose of the research. The source: http://science.sciencemag.org/content/354/6312/aaf5239 http://science.sciencemag.org/content/354/6312/aaf5239 From the source: The random-impact rule allows us to develop a quantitative model, which systematically untangles the role of productivity and luck in each scientific career. The model predicts that truly high-impact discoveries require a combination of high Q and luck (p) and that increased productivity alone cannot substantially enhance the chance of a very high impact work. (Paraphrased) Where Q = Capability of scientist and potential impact of the chosen problem.

sctb 10y ago
Thanks, we had updated the link from https://keithsawyer.wordpress.com/2016/11/22/are-you-too-old-to-be-brilliant/ https://keithsawyer.wordpress.com/2016/11/22/are-you-too-old... a little while ago.

cvarjas 10y ago

PDF available from one of the authors: http://www.dashunwang.com/pdf/Sinatra2016-Science.pdf http://www.dashunwang.com/pdf/Sinatra2016-Science.pdf