QED Science ads

Today, Nature published a Q&A with our co-founder and CEO, Niv Samuel Mastboim, on the question at the heart of QED Science: Can we evaluate scientific work based on the work itself, rather than the prestige surrounding it? We recently assessed 57,455 bioRxiv preprints for originality and validity, independently of author identity, institution, or publication venue. In a separate validation analysis of 2,879 preprints, QED Science rated 12.9% more highly than their eventual journal placement might suggest. We call them hidden gems. 💎 When a blinded expert panel reviewed the strongest disagreements, it preferred the QED-favoured paper in 75% of decisive comparisons. No single score can define good science, and AI should not replace scientific judgement. Our goal is simple: help researchers strengthen their work before publication, and help strong science be recognized for what is actually in the work. Read the full article: https://bit.ly/4wj2Xhk

Science should be judged on the science itself This is as true today as it was when we started QED Science Humanity’s scientific knowledge is built one claim, one experiment, one piece of evidence at a time. These building blocks deserve to be validated at scale and, when they hold, recognized, celebrated, and built upon “The goal was to judge science on the basis of the work itself, not the journal or the prestige of the authors” I want to thank Nature for the open conversation about what it means to assess originality and validity at scale, the important questions this raises, and where we believe this can go Above all, I want to thank the amazing QED Science team, who see this as their life’s mission, day in and day out There is an enormous sense of responsibility in assessing every claim, every control, and every outlier. Getting this right matters, because behind every scientific finding are decisions about what to investigate next, what evidence to trust, what hypothesis to pursue, and increasingly, in pharma, which programs and therapies to advance Our ambition is not simply to score science It is to make scientific evidence more legible and more trustworthy at the moment decisions are made, while keeping scientists at the center of those decisions, those discoveries If we can do that well, we can help great science get recognized, help researchers see what others might miss, and enable better scientific decisions at a scale that was never possible before https://lnkd.in/dXV---nY

QED evaluated 57,455 preprints and found the strongest 574. Excellence in science, recognized at scale. View the top 1% of scientific preprints: https://lnkd.in/dU3gkHZw

QED Science blindly evaluated 57,455 bioRxiv preprints. Congratulations to the 574 manuscripts that rose to the top. Good science deserves to be seen. Explore The 1%: https://lnkd.in/dU3gkHZw

Out of 57,455 life science preprints, these 574 stood out on the strength of the science itself. Meet The 1%, powered by QED Science. View the selected papers: https://lnkd.in/dU3gkHZw

Will he make the 1%?