You might enjoy what our journal concept will bring to the table with regards to cumulative theory. I'll keep you in the loop if you wish.
-
-
Replying to @bradpwyble @dstephenlindsay and
I'm not sure what you mean, but yeah, sure.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @o_guest @dstephenlindsay and
I mean, allowing comp. models to generate predictions that are tracked through the literature as they are evaluated. Connecting threads..
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @bradpwyble @dstephenlindsay and
I wasn't under the impression that it's currently not something that's facilitated/allowed...?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @o_guest @dstephenlindsay and
My hope is that we can make such theoretical threads more explicit. Currently the only "glue" is in the narrative of the papers, and it >
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @bradpwyble @o_guest and
only extends in a backwards direction. (i.e. hard to follow a thread forward through literature unless someone has written a review)
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @bradpwyble @dstephenlindsay and
I see what you mean. So sort of like collections of theoretically related work?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @o_guest @dstephenlindsay and
Not exactly collections, more like threads that link papers together. Still working on the idea of course.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
-
Replying to @o_guest @dstephenlindsay and
Haha, I almost used that phrase knowing your background. Yes, except with multiple branches.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes
So a tree?
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.