Content pfp
Content
@
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
July pfp
July
@july
China has become a science / engineering super power over the past 20 years https://www.economist.com/science-and-technology/2024/06/12/china-has-become-a-scientific-superpower
10 replies
25 recasts
200 reactions
July pfp
July
@july
One thing I notice in the West especially is this tendency to severely underestimate how much change China has gone through in the past 30ish years. It’s unprecedented at a scale that I don’t portend to even attempt to understand as well, but I think it’s severely overlooked as many in the West
6 replies
5 recasts
114 reactions
Cassie Heart pfp
Cassie Heart
@cassie
Is this a reasonable measure? Top 1% by number of citations, but these citations are not mediated by _who_ is citing the papers. Outside of any specific nation, it's known to be a problem that people will play citations games with their peers to bolster credibility: https://www.nytimes.com/2014/07/11/science/science-journal-pulls-60-papers-in-peer-review-fraud.html
1 reply
0 recast
12 reactions
Dwayne 'The Jock' Ronson pfp
Dwayne 'The Jock' Ronson
@dwayne
what are the fundamental drivers behind this @july ? wondering what it takes for other countries to try to replicate (if that's even possible)
1 reply
0 recast
4 reactions
Liang /degencast SOON🎩 pfp
Liang /degencast SOON🎩
@liang
wonder how the chart would look if you switch high impact to top impact. My bias is China tends to skew these kinda of chart by sheer number
1 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
simon.degen.eth🎩 pfp
simon.degen.eth🎩
@sa
That's an incredible shift. The five years will be interesting. 1000 $degen
0 reply
0 recast
3 reactions
Antony Karagiannis 🎩 pfp
Antony Karagiannis 🎩
@atnsarts
thank you for providing us with this useful content
0 reply
0 recast
3 reactions
Icetoad 🎩 🍕 🎶 pfp
Icetoad 🎩 🍕 🎶
@icetoad.eth
Wow, that's quite the impressive come up
0 reply
0 recast
2 reactions
nano pfp
nano
@nan0
no doubt China committed to be a technological power, & clearly is one. but as @cassie said, the source is crucial here. top 1% cited papers is a game, political. Persuasive use of open access journals, such as "high-impact" journals, are effectively pay-to-play. China is more than happy to drop $5-$12k per paper to get it in these journals, which feed a citation loop. Not implying that they got much of that chart by merit, but certainly there is a boost from OA which skews in their favor, and feeds ability to get requisite prior work to aim for the highest Nature/Science/Cell family offerings. All that said, their growth is certainly impressive, just mainly commenting on OA use. I tried to find a breakdown by country, but could not. I could certainly be way off, but this is what I have noticed personally.
0 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
Pornsoup 🎩 pfp
Pornsoup 🎩
@pornsoup
200 $DEGEN for an interesting post on my feed.
0 reply
0 recast
2 reactions
Blake Burgess pfp
Blake Burgess
@trinitek
Reading the science section of The Economist for a few years has conditioned me to ask how many of those papers have replicability problems. And then, is the ratio of those papers coming out of China worse/avg/better than elsewhere.
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction