4 ms·

In my field that would be impossible... people work in collaborations and you know pretty much all of the experiments.

• hedora 4y ago
  That's usually a consequence of too much nepotism, or some super expensive piece of equipment. Double blind helps the former, though not the latter. In a part of my field that is capital intensive, some well funded newcomers have recently invested a lot, and "broke in", while some incumbent testbeds went away; the "expensive equipment" problem is usually temporary if the field is expanding.
  • cozzyd 4y ago
    It's just that experiments in astroparticle physics are expensive and have lots of people on them. Like, how is the IceCube Collaboration supposed to write an anonymous paper? Even the most cursory description of the detector would give it away...
    • hedora 4y ago
      Well, maybe there will be many IceCube's later? (Probably not, but I'm routinely shocked when I learn about new giant testbeds in my field...) Alternatively, when IceCube 2 comes out, the old IceCube crowd might be focusing on other stuff, and not paying attention to the IceCube 2 politics. That makes them great peer reviewers (no horse in the race, but knowledgeable).
      • cozzyd 4y ago
        The proposed IceCube Gen2 is mostly a superset and only slightly disjoint with IceCube (for example, I am not an IceCube collaborator but I am on Gen2...). But the point is that for experiments that are larger than a few PI's, anonymity of authors is basically impossible (since all papers have everyone on them).
  • cortesoft 4y ago
    It also could just be a small specialty.