@elduvelle follow this thread because the commentary is almost as interesting as the paper (which also looks very cool btw):
https://bsky.app/profile/behrenstimb.bsky.social/post/3m6i6v3ydf22n
Post
@elduvelle follow this thread because the commentary is almost as interesting as the paper (which also looks very cool btw):
https://bsky.app/profile/behrenstimb.bsky.social/post/3m6i6v3ydf22n
@neuralreckoning I'm just glad to know all I need to publish my next paper is to look for missing values and runctitional features in my data
@neuralreckoning "Historical medical frymblal" is a very important point. 😂
@neuralreckoning oooh what's the 2nd article? 👀
(I know, that's not the point of your post but I'm already convinced that Nature Publishing Group sucks and that #eLife is better 😊 )
@elduvelle follow this thread because the commentary is almost as interesting as the paper (which also looks very cool btw):
https://bsky.app/profile/behrenstimb.bsky.social/post/3m6i6v3ydf22n
The paper:
"The inevitability and superfluousness of cell types in spatial cognition", Luo et al. 2025
https://elifesciences.org/reviewed-preprints/99047v2
Quite the poster child for why at @eLife we support publishing papers that we consider important and yet nonetheless label as incomplete: the questions are worth asking, the discussion has to happen, the suggested experiments need to be voiced out and aired, to prompt someone to take them on to the lab.
@albertcardona @elduvelle @eLife yes I'm so glad to see it! So far most eLife papers just looked like normal journal papers, but this shows what the new model can do. Brilliant stuff.
@neuralreckoning @elduvelle @eLife
Can't agree more. Scientific publications are the means for scientists to talk to each other in a formalised way, and not at all as a way to accrue points towards career advancement or funding. Let's retake that original purpose from the choking grasp of the bean counters.
@neuralreckoning ooh.. Just seeing the title I remember having a look at the preprint some time ago and thinking that it made quite bold claims without properly understanding the biology of the "spatial cells". I'll have a look at the thread & eLife reviews when I get a chance!
A space for Bonfire maintainers and contributors to communicate