Krishna Choudhary and Lester Nare introduce the published peer-review record accompanying Bulk hexagonal diamond. They explain how reading the reviewers' questions and the authors' replies provides more context than the final paper alone.
285 words · auto-generated from the episode video
39:04>> Yes. >> Okay? >> Yes. >> So what do you think, right? The peer reviewers are going to read this and >> I just want I just want to note really briefly that because, you know, there is a little bit of a in the zeitgeist right now, there is a public debate about uh Chinese universities. >> Yeah. >> And the legitimacy of the work that they do. I'm saying this is what the zeitgeist conversation is like in the US. And this was published in nature. >> Yeah. >> Um >> Which is a Springer publication from the UK. >> So, you know, and there what's great, which you talked about this recently, is they're now putting the reviewer notes >> Mhm. >> on these papers. >> Yeah. >> So you can get a little bit more of an
39:45insight into how the sausage was made >> Yeah. >> to make a better characterization about your own perspective of the study. >> Yeah. >> And so I'm just I I know that there's I I think there's been a little bit of pooh-poohing that's been undeserved. And you can go just look. >> Yeah, and you can look and see what people are saying. >> Right. >> And if we look at that peer review paper, so version zero, that's the one that they initially submit to the editor. The editor then deems, okay, I mean, if it's bulk hexagonal diamond, this does deserve getting published in the nature. So now I'm going to put it off and give it for review to the some of the top scientists in the field who know what they're talking about, okay? Um in this
ChemistryMaterials SciencePhysicsEngineering