8 ms·

Did you read the article? This saga is explicitly mentioned and does not detract from the authors point IMO.

Iwan-Zotow 5y ago
And everything (absolutely EVERYTHING) is open and published
Iwan-Zotow 5y ago
But it does! Author is just plain wrong. Here there is piece of the very important math research which community failed to replicated in either positive way (confirm it) or negative way (reject it)
- sgillen 5y ago
  Yes but it's famous because it's the exception to the rule. It's definitely a failure to replicate, but that does not necessarily mean that math has a replication crises in the same way the social sciences do.
  - Iwan-Zotow 5y ago
    > It's definitely a failure to replicate, but that does not necessarily mean that math has a replication crises in the same way the social sciences do. But it does! Look, in social sciences there are a lot of lousy papers written by people who doesn't know statistics, acceptance criteria etc. There are problems with "average" papers. In math there are no problems with "average" papers, afaik. People are following those papers and rather quickly find flows or confirm the result. In math there are problems with "exceptional" papers. Holes in Fermat theorem proof or abc paper were taken years to find, patch and settle.
    - ColinWright 5y ago
      What you mention here is not a "replication crisis", it's simply a settling of proofs that are at the advancing edge of the subject. Analysing recent papers is not what the "replication crisis" is about. The "Replication Crisis" is about confirming long-standing results that are widely accepted, and yet when re-examined for the purpose of replication cannot be confirmed.
      - Iwan-Zotow 5y ago
        I fail to see the difference. "abc" was accepted - it was published in the peer-reviewed journal. Mat his different from social studies, but (and here I disagree with OP) it has it's own share of replication problem(s)
        deleted 5y ago
        [deleted]
  - Iwan-Zotow 5y ago
    and abc saga is still ongoing...

And everything (absolutely EVERYTHING) is open and published

But it does! Author is just plain wrong. Here there is piece of the very important math research which community failed to replicated in either positive way (confirm it) or negative way (reject it)

sgillen 5y ago
Yes but it's famous because it's the exception to the rule. It's definitely a failure to replicate, but that does not necessarily mean that math has a replication crises in the same way the social sciences do.
- Iwan-Zotow 5y ago
  > It's definitely a failure to replicate, but that does not necessarily mean that math has a replication crises in the same way the social sciences do. But it does! Look, in social sciences there are a lot of lousy papers written by people who doesn't know statistics, acceptance criteria etc. There are problems with "average" papers. In math there are no problems with "average" papers, afaik. People are following those papers and rather quickly find flows or confirm the result. In math there are problems with "exceptional" papers. Holes in Fermat theorem proof or abc paper were taken years to find, patch and settle.
  - ColinWright 5y ago
    What you mention here is not a "replication crisis", it's simply a settling of proofs that are at the advancing edge of the subject. Analysing recent papers is not what the "replication crisis" is about. The "Replication Crisis" is about confirming long-standing results that are widely accepted, and yet when re-examined for the purpose of replication cannot be confirmed.
    - Iwan-Zotow 5y ago
      I fail to see the difference. "abc" was accepted - it was published in the peer-reviewed journal. Mat his different from social studies, but (and here I disagree with OP) it has it's own share of replication problem(s)
      - deleted 5y ago
        [deleted]
- Iwan-Zotow 5y ago
  and abc saga is still ongoing...