Will Sophie Schauman's post "improved quality control in science" win first or second place in the Cause Exploration Prizes?
🏅 Top traders
| # | Name | Total profit |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Ṁ41 | |
| 2 | Ṁ8 | |
| 3 | Ṁ5 | |
| 4 | Ṁ3 | |
| 5 | Ṁ1 |
Best idea.
“New mechanisms of quality control of science could include issuing of bounties for finding erroneous or falsified results in the published literature, promotion of fraud detection tools, and supporting of organizations dedicated to quality control and reproducibility in science.”
Any sane system would allocate 1-10% of all scientific funding to these; allow rights of action against fraudulent scientists (criminal and civil) and otherwise hold anyone receiving govt funding to the same standards imposed on those who commit traditional fraud.
@Gigacasting I agree this is the best idea. It is also what my company does. Also, if scientists take public money and do fraudulent research they can and do get prosecuted https://www.nature.com/articles/nature.2015.17660