3 ms·

> The abstract is more informative than the press coverage: Isn't that usually the case? :-(

• philipkglass 9y ago
  When there's a really good technical improvement in an area, and few compromises required to make the improvement, then the press release, the abstract, and the full article can be about equally informative to someone wondering whether or not the touted breakthrough actually matters. Here's an example with a genuinely impressive improved flow battery chemistry from Harvard: https://www.seas.harvard.edu/news/2017/02/long-lasting-flow-battery-could-run-for-more-than-decade-with-minimum-upkeep https://www.seas.harvard.edu/news/2017/02/long-lasting-flow-... When the good news is a mixed bag, like this article under discussion (high efficiency solar cell... but not a record setter and touted numbers required concentrated sunlight) then the abstract is more informative than the press release. When the "good" news required severe compromises on one or more key axes, then both the abstract and the press release (if there is one) will usually hide the important compromises. It's fun to guess which common pitfall the reported advance fell into before you read the full paper that reveals the bad news not found in the PR/abstract. Caveat: if the press release is about something that the general public can't contextualize easily -- metrology, basic research before applications, algorithms... -- then the press office rolls a die to randomly determine whether they should claim that the new advance may one day cure diseases, cure pollution, or make your cell phone run longer between recharges.