up to three, from one to three. They were not forced to use the three votes.
26.02.2026 15:43
👍 1
🔁 0
💬 0
📌 0
up to three, from one to three. They were not forced to use the three votes.
Read this @emboreports.org paper here=> link.springer.com/article/10.1...
Thanks for the nice highlight :-) Note: the bar chart is the fraction of total votes. Respondents could cast up to three votes. Ahem, perhaps not the best design in our survey 😬, but we wanted people to express a range of choices. So 30% of the votes went to the "authoring" tool.
Our joint study with EMBO is just out! We are proud to be at the forefront of this sea change. AI will reinforce the central role of scientists in this new era. Strong science should be seen!
@embo.org @reviewcommons.org @tlemberger.bsky.social
link.springer.com/article/10.1...
It was a very cool experiment! The author-centric perspective makes a lot of sense.
An important next step is to benchmark multiple AI review platforms. Maybe this can also pave the way for benchmarking human peer review across journals and defining "quality features" of the peer review process.
It’s finally out! Together with @embopress.org and
@reviewcommons.org, we conducted a structured side-by-side comparison of human peer review and our AI scientific review (see thread 👇👇👇🔥).
The preprint #PeerReview platform Review Commons was launched at the 2019 ASCB | EMBO Meeting to make scientific #publishing more open and effective. Thomas Lemberger, lead of the initiative, tells us more about the platform: https://www.embo.org/features/review-commons-rethinking-peer-review/ 🧪
Cool 😎 Scholar Labs: an AI-powered Google Scholar search.
scholar.googleblog.com/2025/11/scho...
Honored to be included in this reflection on 20 excellent years of MolSystBiol! From our first phosphotyrosine interactome in 2005 to proteome-wide networks - scale has grown exponentially. MS proteomics + AI is transforming systems-level understanding. Exciting times!
embopress.org/doi/pdf/10.1...
Can't wait to see @qedscience.bsky.social commenting on works produced by platform.edisonscientific.com (arxiv.org/abs/2511.02824) and reading the rebuttal letter...
IT'S HAPPENING! 💥 I'm psyched to launch the collaboration between @qedscience.bsky.social & @openrxiv.bsky.social @biorxivpreprint.bsky.social! Preprint + q.e.d = your science is out there, and anyone can appreciate it. Let's care about making discoveries, and not on “getting published” (1/3) 👇
Very cool! I agree AI scientific review can be useful if it is transparent. It is all progressing very fast and will change everything. @qedScience @bioRxiv is a great first step. We are doing some human-based eval, so more soon from @EMBOPress @ReviewCommons with @qedScience. Watch this space ;-)
Last week on 11–12 Sep, together with our publishing partner @springernature.com, EMBO hosted a workshop "AI to advance open science publishing” in Heidelberg, DE. 🧪 Participants engaged in demonstrations and experiments using tools developed by Springer Nature and EMBO for innovation in publishing.
Two metrics designed for measuring the impact of investments in the specific context of life sciences (in brief: the metrics assess the potential increase in life years attributable to the investment & the improvement in quality of life) ➡️ www.nature.com/articles/s41...
🤖✍️ How is #AI transforming scientific publishing? From trust to truth, @tlemberger.bsky.social @embopress.org explains what’s changing and why it matters for all of us.
youtu.be/k-_MuFEwFx0 @salmaamin.bsky.social @mkiwanski.bsky.social
Correction: 40,000 spectators.
A message of hope and optimism in these crazy times: Gewandhaus Orchestra open air concert, in Leipzig, Germany, right now: 20,000 people peacefully listening to the music of Max Bruch. Beautiful event.
An important, moving, and courageous piece from @juliosaezrod.bsky.social Respect!
"Becoming a patient has given me a new perspective on biomedical research. Despite my background in data analytics, I have found that I do not necessarily have access to the data or information I need..."
Could these unlucky applications be transferred and "re-used" to other funding agencies? A @reviewcommons.org for funding?
#TCTeAC - the Woodstock of Biology2 & #nightscience - was such an amazing event!! We met great scientists who creatively presented their high quality work. We dreamt and discussed in a very broad, open-minded setting. Talking science outside of our nutshell can be soo valuable - let's do this again!
Let's not be #TCTeAC "The Conference To END All Conferences", but a new format of many more such events. Depating science outside of our typical nutshell (scientifically and mentally) has great potential - we could have come up with 50+ project proposals together. Let's bring fun back to science :)
Those who confessed received my absolution for only a modest APC (Absolution Participation Charge)
Was a cool experience! I was very touched by the conversations. Did not expect this…
@paveltomancak.bsky.social and @itaiyanai.bsky.social fighting /debating about the hourglass idea
#theconferencetoendallconferences #TCTeAC
#fightforsciemce at #TCTeAC with #nightscience :) cell & gene people gather together.
(no scientist got hurt)
Our publishing process needs to be revolutionised @odedrechavi.bsky.social #TCTeAC high-quality AI generated peer review
Introverts at the Woodstock of Biology
#theconferencetoendallconferences #TCTeAC
I'm late to review the "Illusion of Thinking" paper, so let me collect some of the best threads by and critical takes by @scaling01 in one place and sprinkle some of my own thoughts in as well.
The paper is rather critical of reasoning LLMs (LRMs):
x.com/MFarajtabar...
In the meantime, Claude 4 is out, and the progress continues, albeit clearly remaining subthreshold in many benchmarks. Probably a matter of time and/or dedicated (rogue) training efforts...
Claude 4 system card:
www-cdn.anthropic.com/6be99a52cb68...
Indeed, working on it as we speak!
