Maybe the easiest and strongest counterargument against this paper is that a 97% accuracy is extremely unlikely because 97% is a near perfect score even though

Maybe the easiest and strongest counterargument against this paper is that a 97% accuracy is extremely unlikely because 97% is a near perfect score even though hit songs are distributed according to a power law [1]. If we could predict this power law with 97% accuracy, then we could also predict the next successful CEOs, companies, and soccer players with 97% accuracy. But we can't. Anyway, it doesn't matter. Science is measured by popularity (citations), and not by truth. With that in mind, it's a nice paper. It has a nice story. It has some complicated graphs. It is difficult for a layman to figure out the problem. So, yes, it's a successful academic paper. It's a great read and very interesting, according to academia. [1]: https://michaeltauberg.medium.com/power-law-in-popular-media-7d7efef3fb7c https://michaeltauberg.medium.com/power-law-in-popular-media...