When I read the title, I thought “Surely this Larry cannot be more cited than the famous F. D. C. Willard”. But then I read the article and it turns out that’s very specifically the record Larry broke.
Link?
Reese Richardson, a graduate student in metascience and computational biology
…ladies
Is he also very stretchy?
Thanks!
It feels very strange to me that any serious citation counter would index ResearchGate, which AFAIK don’t have any check before publishing a preprint. It is basically a more reputable vixra.
But then again citation count, or “impact factor”, are in general quite bad to determine the quality of one’s research, and often can be easily manipulated even through legitimist means: simply publish more mediocre papers.
I read it as “world’s most excited cat” and was confused on how someone is supposed to interpret from that face as the cat being “excited” 😅
This face is as excited as a cat can get.
What if Larry spent all his days daydreaming about numerical analysis and the crisis of replicability of scoentific articles, but all he could say was “meow”?
I read “the most edited cat” and know I don’t know anymore
I 'member hearing that this “practice” started when a lone researcher tried to publish an articule but was rejected 'cause it was policy that all submissions needed a co-author… and it went trough, he was able to publish this and others really good articules.
So, i dont see anything bad here, mr whiskers can be remembered by future generations with no harm done.
This is actually gaming the Google Scholar system instead of harmless ones like Willard.
If Furry McFluffface contributes to an article by giving moral support and occasionally walking across the keyboard, it’s only fair to make him co-author.
