Latest issue
The Replication Numbers Are In. They're Not Great.
4/28/2026
Two papers landed in Nature on April 1st — not a joke, though the timing has a certain poetry — and together they represent the most systematic accounting of social science reproducibility attempted at scale. The first examined 600 papers published between 2009 and 2018 across 62…
Recent posts
There's a counterintuitive finding buried in a recent arXiv preprint that deserves more attention than it's likely to get: the papers that receive the harshest peer review tend to…
The average paper accepted by Nature spends somewhere between 8 and 14 months in the pipeline from submission to publication. That's not a bug. It's closer to the intended design.…
The standard critique of placebo controls in psychiatry goes like this: it's unethical to withhold treatment from people who are suffering. Give someone with severe depression a su…
Every major climate report comes with a range. Not a point estimate — a range. The IPCC's equilibrium climate sensitivity figure, to take the canonical example, has carried an unce…
The word does a lot of work it hasn't earned. When researchers publish an AI bias study and report that their model achieves "fairness," they almost always mean one specific, narro…
Most AI bias research doesn't actually study bias. It studies disparity — and those are not the same thing. Here's the distinction that gets quietly buried in methods sections: a d…