Luís and João Batalha: Fermat's Library and the Art of Studying Papers | Lex Fridman Podcast #209 | Summary and Q&A

TL;DR

The current scientific publishing system is flawed, with journals behind paywalls and metrics that prioritize quantity over quality. Open platforms and crowdsourced review processes can revolutionize access to scientific knowledge and improve the dissemination of research.

Key Insights

• ♿ The current scientific publishing system restricts access to knowledge, hindering collaboration and inhibiting scientific progress.
• 🤗 Open platforms and crowdsourced review processes offer alternatives to traditional journals, promoting accessibility and facilitating collaboration.
• 🍉 Metrics should be redefined to prioritize quality and long-term impact rather than quantity.
• 🏮 The backstory behind scientific papers can provide valuable context and humanize the scientific process.

Transcript

the following is a conversation with luiz and joao batala brothers and co-founders of firma's library which is an incredible platform for annotating papers as they write on the formats library website justice pierre de fermat scribbled his famous last theorem in the margins professional scientists academics and citizen scientists can annotate equat... Read More

Questions & Answers

Q: How can the backstory of scientific papers contribute to a better understanding of the ideas presented?

The backstory of scientific papers provides context and humanizes the scientific process. Understanding the journey, challenges, and inspirations behind a paper can enhance the appreciation and comprehension of the ideas presented. It highlights that science is a collaborative and iterative endeavor.

Q: What is the role of annotations and collaborative reviews in improving scientific understanding?

Annotations and collaborative reviews allow for the clarification and expansion of ideas presented in scientific papers. They provide additional context, explanations, and alternative viewpoints, making complex concepts more accessible and encouraging collaboration and critical thinking among researchers.

Q: How can open platforms like arXiv and bioRxiv revolutionize scientific publishing?

Open platforms like arXiv and bioRxiv allow for the rapid dissemination of research without paywalls, enabling wider access to scientific knowledge. They facilitate the sharing of preprints, allowing researchers to receive feedback and collaborate in real-time, ultimately accelerating the pace of scientific discovery.

Q: How can crowdsourced review processes and alternative metrics improve the scientific publishing system?

Crowdsourced review processes involve a larger pool of reviewers, diverse in expertise and background, resulting in more comprehensive and rigorous evaluations. Alternative metrics, such as impact focused on relevance and societal impact, can provide a more holistic assessment of a paper's quality and significance, encouraging high-quality research and reducing the emphasis on quantity.

Q: How can the backstory of scientific papers contribute to a better understanding of the ideas presented?

The backstory of scientific papers provides context and humanizes the scientific process. Understanding the journey, challenges, and inspirations behind a paper can enhance the appreciation and comprehension of the ideas presented. It highlights that science is a collaborative and iterative endeavor.

More Insights

• The current scientific publishing system restricts access to knowledge, hindering collaboration and inhibiting scientific progress.

• Open platforms and crowdsourced review processes offer alternatives to traditional journals, promoting accessibility and facilitating collaboration.

• Metrics should be redefined to prioritize quality and long-term impact rather than quantity.

• The backstory behind scientific papers can provide valuable context and humanize the scientific process.

• Revolutionizing scientific publishing requires breaking the barriers of paywalls, embracing openness, and fostering a culture of collaboration and transparency.

Summary

In this conversation, Luiz and Joao Batala, co-founders of Fermat's Library, discuss the importance of understanding the backstory behind scientific papers, the challenges of scientific publishing, and potential ideas for revolutionizing the scientific process. They highlight the potential of collaborative platforms like Archive, as well as the importance of open access to scientific research. They also touch on the power of social experiments like the Polymath Projects and the need to move away from the current metrics-driven system of scientific publishing.

Questions & Answers

Q: How can understanding the backstory behind scientific papers provide more context and make them easier to understand?

Understanding the backstory behind scientific papers can provide valuable context to the work of scientists and debunk the misconception that scientific breakthroughs happen solely through eureka moments. It reveals that papers are often chapters in a much larger and complex story. For example, Feynman's QED paper came about after he lost enthusiasm for physics and discovered the equations of motion while observing plates in a cafeteria. The backstory can provide insights into the motivations and thought processes that led to the ideas presented in the paper.

Q: Does the ease of implementing breakthroughs in machine learning contribute to the perception that scientific discoveries are made through brilliant moments of insight rather than effort?

In machine learning, there is a sense that breakthroughs can happen quickly due to the ease of coding and running experiments on a single machine. However, this may not be the case in other fields like mathematics, where the process may involve years of dedicated work. While there may be low-hanging fruit in some areas, it's important to acknowledge the effort and complexity involved in scientific discoveries.

Q: Are there other examples of the importance of the human side in scientific breakthroughs?

Yes, examples like Newton's interest in alchemy, Feynman's wit and social skills, and Freeman Dyson's humility and openness to collaboration demonstrate the important role that personality traits and personal interests can play in scientific breakthroughs. These qualities can intersect with scientific curiosity and lead to a deeper understanding and appreciation of the subject matter.

Q: What is Fermat's Library and what is its main goal?

Fermat's Library is a platform for annotating scientific papers, making them more accessible and easier to understand. The goal is to bring clarity and context to dense academic papers and create a collaborative space for researchers to share knowledge and insights through annotations and discussions. The platform also includes a browser extension called Librarian, which offers additional features like extracting references and generating citations.

Q: What are the limitations of platforms like Archive and how can they be improved?

While Archive has been a valuable platform for hosting preprints, it has limitations in terms of collaboration and review processes. There are opportunities to build additional features on top of Archive, such as annotation capabilities, code sharing, and improved metrics for differentiating quality work from others. By enhancing collaboration and interaction among researchers, these platforms can foster a more efficient and effective scientific process.

Q: How can the peer review process be revolutionized?

The current scientific publishing ecosystem, where researchers give away their work for free, reviewers provide feedback for free, and institutions buy access to the research, is flawed. The peer review process should be reevaluated and improved to prioritize quality and impact rather than metrics like impact factor. One possibility is to favor collaborative efforts and experiments like the Polymath Projects, where large groups of researchers work together online to solve specific problems. By breaking away from the current metrics-driven system, science can become more accessible and effective.

Takeaways

The scientific publishing ecosystem faces various challenges, including limited accessibility and the dominance of metrics-driven approaches. Understanding the human side and the backstories behind scientific breakthroughs can provide valuable context and inspire new ideas. Collaborative platforms like Archive and Fermat's Library offer opportunities for improved collaboration and interaction among researchers. The peer review process should be rethought and focus on quality and impact rather than metrics. By embracing open access and fostering a culture of collaboration, science can become a more inclusive and impactful discipline.

Summary & Key Takeaways

• Scientific articles are often inaccessible to the public due to paywalls, limiting the free dissemination of ideas. This goes against the principles of science and hinders collaboration and problem-solving.

• A broken peer review process, driven by metrics and competition, leads to gaming the system and low-quality research. It neglects the importance of quality and long-term impact.

• Open platforms like arXiv and bioRxiv offer alternatives to traditional journals, allowing for the sharing of preprints and collaborative annotations that enhance accessibility and understanding.

• Crowdsourced review processes and metrics that focus on impact and relevance can revolutionize scientific publishing, making knowledge more accessible and promoting quality research.