New Trends in Trending

Today Nature Publishing House has announced the creation of a new and long overdue journal dedicated to publishing the ‘most hottest’ high impact research. The new magazine, called ‘New Trends in Trending’ is dedicated to publishing results that would not have been otherwise published in any other journal for at least five years into the future. Alongside this so-called ‘hyper-original research’, the new monthly will feature a horoscope, and comes with a lottery to win an Island off the coast of Kamchatka.

“Our aim is the impact factor of 1000” wrote Chief Editor Dr. Quickley R. Lookthrough in his first editorial “and our market study tells us this is how we get there”.

Manuscript submission guidelines require that along with the scientific title of each submitted manscript, the authors provide a ‘clickbait’ version of the title ‘to facilitate the broadest dissemination of to the most general audience possible’. A ‘clickbait’ title is meant to convey the premise of the work, but leave the conclusion concealed such that the reader is encouraged to click on the link to find out more. In order to assist the authors, the following clickbait title examples are provided:

They were measuring a graphene device, and then THIS happened!

Thirty-two line plots with error bars that will blow your mind. (You won’t believe the number seventeen!)

Two electrons did whaaat?

If you are doing science and you are older than 3 and younger than 98 you are in for a big surprise

Jaw-dropping discovery hits the field of dissipative porous multiphase systems like a hurricane

These quantum systems thought nobody was watching…

Why this new scaling theory is breaking the internet

Experimentalists feel stupid for not doing these measurements

Don’t read this if you DO NOT want a Nobel Prize

Group website

Sometime during the first year of our group I asked one of my graduate students to put together a group website. “Let’s first finish our first paper” he replied. This attitude shows how seriously we take websites. Not just anything deserves to have a website. Only things of staggering beautymind-blowing webdesign or the friendliest user interface can be websites. Still,

Now that our group has fired out the first series of papers, and even though the papers are still painfully making their way through the antiquated journal system, it is time to unveil a modest yet informative little website.

As a side effect, since this blog no longer represents our whole group my hands are now officially untied, and I can proclaim the most ridiculous thoughts here.

First paper finished

High critical magnetic field superconducting contacts to Ge/Si core/shell nanowires

Screenshot 2016-10-10 23.13.27.png

My group has crossed an important milestone today – we have finalized and uploaded to arxiv our first publication. We are working on several of them simultaneously, and by the luck of the draw the first one out is a paper in which we share our experience making a particular type of nanowire superconducting.

The one and only good thing about writing papers is that it stimulates the authors to think about the experiment they have done in a special way: to find explanations for strange values and effects that only come forward when you give it that extra careful look. That tenth reading that you do under duress of scientific correctness. When we transition into the era of open science, we will share all our results on the fly, and look like fools for all our misconceptions and mistakes, but we will correct each other and move forward much faster. We will parallelize our intellects to think about each other’s work and won’t need to read the same text over and over again not to miss an embarassing mistake.

For now we just keep writing papers.

Should arxiv have ranking and annotation features? is a great resource where many, if not the majority, of results in my field appear long before formal publication in journals. In fact, I don’t have a habit of reading physics journals anymore, but I daily look through new postings on arxiv.I also have two papers submitted only to arxiv, and not to any old-fashioned journal.

That said, arxiv is stuck in the 1990’ies with its focus on lists, TeX, its awkward search and lack of any social network functions. Since it is such a convergence point for the physics community, its backwardness has grown into a serious limiting factor for the free and open scientific process. In other words, what it offers – namely instant publication – is better than what journals offer, but this has in the meantime become the new normal. While what it does not offer is holding us back.

This can be seen in the new massive survey that arxiv has conducted of its own users. In a long list of boring questions about tiny incremental improvements to the website, there is a very important category they called ‘New Services’. You will see that over 55% of survey respondents say that ranking and comment functions, familiar from social networks, reddits, and just, ahem, the entire internet, are either ‘Very Important’ or ‘Somewhat Important’. A smaller majority has just taken the UK out of the EU!

Yet the arxiv program director at Cornell Oya Rieger writes about it as an even split between those who are strongly for these features (~35%) and those strongly against (~35%). She goes on an on about caution and caveats, which basically means that her and the arxiv team are not going to do this on their own. She does mention that the support for these features is stronger among younger users, so there may be a generational divide at play here, and the arxiv team is on the wrong side of this divide from the historical point of view.

Think about it: all of arxiv content is open to the entire internet. If somebody makes a different website which implements these annotation, ranking, search, communication features nicely, and if the community starts using that service, then not having these features as part of itself will be akin to hiding one’s head in the sand – ignoring the new norm that just grew around you. Now, this has not happened yet, but the demand for it is clearly present, as the survey results demonstrate. When this finally happens, it will be the beginning of the end of arxiv, as at that point it will be easier to submit your work to the new website where it can be instantly evaluated, discussed, ranked, categorized and improved through community interactions.

Nanolithography Expert Position

University of Pittsburgh Peteresen Institute of Nanoscience and Engineering is hiring a PhD-level expert in electron beam and optical lithography. This job is for someone to develop lithography processes in close cooperation with research groups at Pitt, and to take full advantage of the Raith e-Line system, as well as of the  brand new Elionix 100kV machine that is shortly arriving to the Carnegie Mellon cleanroom next doors. Our nano team, once complete, will have four PhD-level experts in different areas of nanofabrication and nanocharacterization.


Full job announcement can be found here