4 ms·

Senior author is a euphemism for "happens to run the lab". Explains why the other "senior authors" are lashing out, they never expected having to know what a pa

Senior author is a euphemism for "happens to run the lab". Explains why the other "senior authors" are lashing out, they never expected having to know what a paper that bears their name is all about.

rsfern 3y ago
Sure - the point is that the preprint wasn’t posted by a student without permission of their advisor, it was posted by a professor without (apparently) permission of their collaborators, who aren’t part of a monolithic lab for what it’s worth. However, I generally agree with your take, and the response seems to me to kind of dodge the responsibility for methodology issues. that responsibility is not really compatible with the “hey we’re submitting to arxiv in a few days, last chance for comments” approach to collaboration that seems to be the minimum expected bar for signing off on the submission form that all authors are aware and agree to publication
- sheepscreek 3y ago
  Posted by a lecturer, not a professor I believe.
  - rsfern 3y ago
    He’s an associate professor at BU, and I guess a lecturer at MIT
YeGoblynQueenne 3y ago
That's nonsense. Senior authors may not contribute text to the paper but they will normally be involved in every other way - reading drafts, making recommendations, directing the research. I know it's standard on HN to accuse senior academics of exploiting their PhD students and I'm pretty sure there is plenty of that to go around but it is a very rare PhD student that can write a publishable paper without advise and guidance from their advisor. The name gives a hint, even. I'm speaking in this as a recently graduated PhD student btw. I don't have any conflicts of interest (well, not yet, hopefully). It sucks that many students have absolutely rotten relations with their advisors but that's exactly because the student depends so much on the advisor for direction that it's easy for the power differential to be exploited by unscrupulous individuals.
- stefan_ 3y ago
  The main thrust of their complaint (as paper authors!) is that they used the "copyrighted" exam questions. I don't understand how both can be true: to have contributed to this paper, which entirely rests on ChatGPT (not) answering exam questions, and not knowing that that is what the paper is all about. That is certainly an issue that would be discovered well before anyone is sitting down to write the actual paper.
dgacmu 3y ago
This may be true in some fields but it's generally not the case in academic computer science. (Generally.)

Senior author is a euphemism for "happens to run the lab". Explains why the other "senior authors" are lashing out, they never expected having to know what a paper that bears their name is all about.

rsfern 3y ago

Sure - the point is that the preprint wasn’t posted by a student without permission of their advisor, it was posted by a professor without (apparently) permission of their collaborators, who aren’t part of a monolithic lab for what it’s worth. However, I generally agree with your take, and the response seems to me to kind of dodge the responsibility for methodology issues. that responsibility is not really compatible with the “hey we’re submitting to arxiv in a few days, last chance for comments” approach to collaboration that seems to be the minimum expected bar for signing off on the submission form that all authors are aware and agree to publication

sheepscreek 3y ago
Posted by a lecturer, not a professor I believe.
- rsfern 3y ago
  He’s an associate professor at BU, and I guess a lecturer at MIT

YeGoblynQueenne 3y ago

That's nonsense. Senior authors may not contribute text to the paper but they will normally be involved in every other way - reading drafts, making recommendations, directing the research. I know it's standard on HN to accuse senior academics of exploiting their PhD students and I'm pretty sure there is plenty of that to go around but it is a very rare PhD student that can write a publishable paper without advise and guidance from their advisor. The name gives a hint, even. I'm speaking in this as a recently graduated PhD student btw. I don't have any conflicts of interest (well, not yet, hopefully). It sucks that many students have absolutely rotten relations with their advisors but that's exactly because the student depends so much on the advisor for direction that it's easy for the power differential to be exploited by unscrupulous individuals.

stefan_ 3y ago
The main thrust of their complaint (as paper authors!) is that they used the "copyrighted" exam questions. I don't understand how both can be true: to have contributed to this paper, which entirely rests on ChatGPT (not) answering exam questions, and not knowing that that is what the paper is all about. That is certainly an issue that would be discovered well before anyone is sitting down to write the actual paper.

dgacmu 3y ago

This may be true in some fields but it's generally not the case in academic computer science. (Generally.)