I’ve been in a meeting with government research officials where a director of the primary global institution in that field described how when she writes or does research and writes papers she draws a graph she needs to support her research or a point she is trying to make and then goes to look for the data to create that graph.
Maybe I’m missing something, but I do not believe that is the way it is stopped to go. Btw, she has a PhD and failed up into a global scale.
I’ve been meaning to find out if there are any open tools to evaluate someone’s dissertation.
It was equal part stunning and seemingly a bit traumatizing to me considering I still remember it as if it had happened earlier today. I think what surprised me too was her open admission of it, even with external parties present.
So she establishes a hypothesis (draws a graph or picks a point to make) and then tests it through experimentation (looks for data to support the hypothesis)? Isn't that just the scientific method worded another way?
Wait until the GP knows about how scientists generate Monte-Carlo (MC) simulation data to see what a positive results looks like and then do meta analysis for both real data and MC.
Maybe I’m missing something, but I do not believe that is the way it is stopped to go. Btw, she has a PhD and failed up into a global scale.
I’ve been meaning to find out if there are any open tools to evaluate someone’s dissertation.
It was equal part stunning and seemingly a bit traumatizing to me considering I still remember it as if it had happened earlier today. I think what surprised me too was her open admission of it, even with external parties present.