Sign in

Michele Avissar-Whiting

@madubs.bsky.social
410 followers 178 following 127 posts

Director, Open Science Strategy @ HHMI My posts, my opinions

PostsRepliesMedia
Reposted by Michele Avissar-Whiting
Leah Houri-Zeevi @leahhouri.bsky.social · 25/09/2026
🩸🩸🩸TODAY WE SHARE TWO MAJOR DISCOVERIES🩸🩸🩸 1. We peered into genomes and brains of the rare mosquitoes that QUIT feeding on blood and found what biting is built from 2. Humans got rid of isoleucine in their blood, malaria suffers from it, and mosquito proteomes budget for it THREADS>
58447
Michele Avissar-Whiting @madubs.bsky.social · 21/09/2026
This is spot on, but speaks exactly to the knee-jerk quality of peoples' responses.
110
Reposted by Michele Avissar-Whiting
Richard Sever @richardsever.bsky.social · 21/09/2026
"any answer to 'is AI good for science' that neatly fits into a single yes or no is unserious...here is an invitation to join the real discussion" Thoughtful piece by @blekhman.bsky.social on a subject that provokes knee-jerk responses for and against. blekhman.substack.com/p/the-ai-dis...
blekhman.substack.com
The AI Discourse in Academia is Toxic. It Doesn’t have to be.
You are allowed to have a nuanced opinion about AI
3228
Reposted by Michele Avissar-Whiting
Open Research Funders Group @orfg.bsky.social · 26/08/2026
ORFG members Michael J. Fox Foundation and @asapresearch.parkinsonsroadmap.org are leading the way with their access-to-research policies. Read more in this @sparcopen.bsky.social impact story. sparcopen.org/impact-story... #OpenScience #ResearchPolicy #OpenResearch
sparcopen.org
Parkinson’s Research Funders Lead the Way with Progressive Open Access and Open Science Policies - SPARC
To accelerate the understanding of Parkinson’s disease, improve treatment, and, ultimately, find a cure, two prominent funders in the field have recently expanded their requirements for grantees to…
022
Reposted by Michele Avissar-Whiting
Richard Sever @richardsever.bsky.social · 13/08/2026
bioRxiv/medRxiv have been dealing with endless bot attacks recently (plus usual DDOS stuff, etc). Tricky to address without impacting genuine users - many of you affected. Apologies. We're working with our hosting service on solutions & think we're getting there [he shouts in his Red Queen costume].
716859
Reposted by Michele Avissar-Whiting
Open Research Funders Group @orfg.bsky.social · 17/08/2026
🎉 ORFG is pleased to welcome The Michael J. Fox Foundation for Parkinson's Research as its newest member! We're excited to have the foundation as an open science leader and collaborator in our community. www.orfg.org/news/2026/3/...
orfg.org
Michael J. Fox Foundation Joins ORFG — Open Research Funders Group
The Open Research Funders Group (ORFG) is pleased to welcome The Michael J. Fox Foundation for Parkinson’s Research (MJFF) as its newest contributing member.
074
Michele Avissar-Whiting @madubs.bsky.social · 01/08/2026
"Once there is no need for humans to run the economy anymore, the AGI oligarchy begins harvesting the organic biosphere, including humans, as building materials and fuel for manufacturing a next generation of carbon-based AI systems." Happy Friday, y'all 📎 arxiv.org/pdf/2507.09369
arxiv.org
000
Reposted by Michele Avissar-Whiting
Richard Sever @richardsever.bsky.social · 03/07/2026
Last month was another record for bioRxiv submissions. The pandemic surge and lag now clearly in the past and the growth continues. Thanks as ever to all the authors, readers affiliates, funders and amazing internal openRxiv team who make this happen!
67422
Michele Avissar-Whiting @madubs.bsky.social · 30/06/2026
I thought Pangram was optimized for virtually no false positives?
100
Reposted by Michele Avissar-Whiting
Harmit Singh Malik @harmitmalik.bsky.social · 24/06/2026
I know it seems like a heretical idea, but one way to figure out if a preprint is really interesting (to you) is... to read the preprint. Then, in the spirit of sharing, send a note to authors: a simple kudos or a more detailed question. I do this a dozen times a year. It's awesome. Try it.
1229164
Michele Avissar-Whiting @madubs.bsky.social · 20/05/2026
Also, here's the result I got with the exact same software 🤷‍♀️
110
Michele Avissar-Whiting @madubs.bsky.social · 20/05/2026
but also very possible that a Director of graduate science writing at NYU is a skilled writer, and these detectors are not adept at spotting the difference.
110
Michele Avissar-Whiting @madubs.bsky.social · 14/05/2026
To your point, @ludowaltman.bsky.social, perhaps Research Square would have served as a useful control (also well-integrated into journal system, but inverse to SSRN w/r/t disciplinary spread),
010
Michele Avissar-Whiting @madubs.bsky.social · 09/05/2026
Omg…it’s almost like it was always destined to sound like this
120
Michele Avissar-Whiting @madubs.bsky.social · 08/05/2026
All time favorite RW story
020
Michele Avissar-Whiting @madubs.bsky.social · 06/05/2026
We also need serious disincentives for fraud, but that’s downstream of course.
000
Michele Avissar-Whiting @madubs.bsky.social · 06/05/2026
The last two items could have been sub-bullets of that one, but then there are also the usual suspects: FAIR data and analysis code. None of these things are bullet proof but they all create much needed friction.
110
Michele Avissar-Whiting @madubs.bsky.social · 06/05/2026
No, we don't need better tools to detect AI - that horse bolted last year. We need to move upstream. Stop incentivizing volume, raise the bar for legitimacy, require verifiable provenance, and solve the identity validation problem. www.nature.com/articles/d41...
nature.com
How much of the scientific literature is generated by AI?
Tools for reliably estimating what artificial intelligence is being used for are still lacking.
2102
Michele Avissar-Whiting @madubs.bsky.social · 02/05/2026
Fair enough, I'm staying in my (experimental biology) lane here - in which a figure without its data is now worth less than the ink it takes to print it.
210
Michele Avissar-Whiting @madubs.bsky.social · 02/05/2026
But also: Data without a paper is potential. A paper without data is just prose.
110
Reposted by Michele Avissar-Whiting
Richard Sever @richardsever.bsky.social · 29/04/2026
Despite its importance, peer review is something rarely taught. HHMI have a new peer review training program that takes advantage of preprints openrxiv.org/peer-review-...
openrxiv.org
Peer review training with preprints [Guest post] - openRxiv
About Guest Posts The openRxiv blog includes occasional guest posts on different aspects of science communication and open research. This allows us to provide space for new perspectives from groups pi...
12917
Michele Avissar-Whiting @madubs.bsky.social · 20/04/2026
"We propose a fundamental change in what counts: researchers should be assessed not by journal publications or journal-based metrics, but by the outputs they have publicly shared themselves..." HHMI's pitch for a healthier research assessment paradigm 🚀 zenodo.org/records/1960...
zenodo.org
Realigning incentives for biomedical researchers and journals through researcher-shared outputs
In this preprint the authors propose a shift in what counts in the biomedical sciences: researchers should be recognized for what they choose to share on their own terms and timeline (for example as p...
010
Michele Avissar-Whiting @madubs.bsky.social · 16/04/2026
I think I'm not old enough to be watching Euphoria.
010
Michele Avissar-Whiting @madubs.bsky.social · 16/04/2026
"Maybe truly revolutionary theories must follow that trajectory. If a scientific idea is young and it’s not cringe, it probably has no promise. But if it’s old and it’s still cringe, it probably has no merit." www.experimental-history.com/p/nothing-ev...
experimental-history.com
Nothing ever dies. It merely becomes embarrassing.
OR: the Halo theory of science
000
Michele Avissar-Whiting @madubs.bsky.social · 13/04/2026
I didn't know this was a thing, but it just so happens I procured some mantis eggs yesterday and now waiting for them to hatch!
010
Michele Avissar-Whiting @madubs.bsky.social · 20/03/2026
My favorite part is that “NIH FFS” is one comma away from capturing nearly every scientist’s sentiments about this.
010
Michele Avissar-Whiting @madubs.bsky.social · 01/02/2026
I winced at that bit as well. But this article is clearly aimed at publishers, so it doesn’t surprise me.
010
Michele Avissar-Whiting @madubs.bsky.social · 01/02/2026
This article was shared with me after I read the other one - I agree that it’s better 😁, but the two make a lot of the same points.
120
Michele Avissar-Whiting @madubs.bsky.social · 31/01/2026
This is hands down the best article I've read on this topic: the imperative to transcend the superficiality of the pdf for research outputs. "This is the bridge from search to understanding: from “find me a paper about X” to “help me reason whether X applies in context Y.”
100
Reposted by Michele Avissar-Whiting
Drug Monkey @drugmonkey.bsky.social · 13/01/2026
GLP-1 agonists (eg Ozempic) are showing promise to reduce alcohol drinking and perhaps opioid use. This is, of course, a potential therapeutic success which arises from the random walking of science, not an “efficient” directed research program.
411124
Reposted by Michele Avissar-Whiting
Richard Sever @richardsever.bsky.social · 12/01/2026
Preprints of pandemic potential - new historical piece from me on the history of bioRxiv/medRxiv, their role in the pandemic, and the way forward. 1/n journals.asm.org/doi/10.1128/...
38741
Reposted by Michele Avissar-Whiting
Helen Branswell 🇨🇦 @helenbranswell.bsky.social · 09/01/2026
Did slashing multiple vaccines from the childhood vaccine schedule bring the US in line with other countries? In a word, no. The US now recommends all kids be protected against fewer diseases than South Korea, Israel, Saudi Arabia, Taiwan & many more. www.statnews.com/2026/01/09/c...
statnews.com
When it comes to vaccine schedules, the U.S. is now the outlier
A STAT analysis of vaccine recommendations in 38 countries suggests the U.S. is now an outlier.
19647
Michele Avissar-Whiting @madubs.bsky.social · 09/01/2026
"[Our current ecosystem] treats shared infrastructure like a free beer rather than a free puppy." An important read on the dangers of open purism, though I'm not sure I agree with the ultimate conclusion. Maybe creative solutions will emerge. rosalynmetz.substack.com/p/openness-h...
rosalynmetz.substack.com
Openness Has Limits
Part 4 of a 5-part series on the politics of preservation and power.
000
Michele Avissar-Whiting @madubs.bsky.social · 07/01/2026
I rarely appreciate a bumper sticker...
Bumper sticker that reads "How am I driving? How does an engine even work? How can a loving god cause such agony"
010
Michele Avissar-Whiting @madubs.bsky.social · 06/01/2026
haha, yes - the latter category are the ones that should probably be retracted. Everything in between is debatable.
010
Michele Avissar-Whiting @madubs.bsky.social · 06/01/2026
(of course LLMs do not need such binaries/discrete outputs, but that's where you start getting into the problems with language interpretability, hallucination, sychophancy etc...all of which may be solved by Spring)
000
Michele Avissar-Whiting @madubs.bsky.social · 06/01/2026
What we ultimately need is something more like a discourse graph with nodes for claims that are either successfully built on or are "dead ends". Done properly, this would both allow for nuance (multiple claims/article) but still provide binaries to satisfy machine readability.
121
Michele Avissar-Whiting @madubs.bsky.social · 06/01/2026
As others in the thread have said, almost everything is "wrong" on some level in the fullness of time. That suggests to me that retraction is not the best implement for correcting the record, not least because it doesn't allow for nuance.
210
Michele Avissar-Whiting @madubs.bsky.social · 06/01/2026
Well, the retraction guy (Ivan Oransky) says at minimum, it should be an order of magnitude higher. That is just based on the minimum proportion likely to be fake or fraudulent. I buy that. The question of what else *should* be retracted is a harder one with a slippery slope problem.
110
Reposted by Michele Avissar-Whiting
Big Dracula Energy @mayawest.online · 31/12/2025
petition to make the entire winter as liminal as the space between Christmas and New Years.
543446
Michele Avissar-Whiting @madubs.bsky.social · 28/12/2025
Damn, Wendy’s
010
Reposted by Michele Avissar-Whiting
Kenny Uong @kennyuong.bsky.social · 14/12/2025
Zoe Weissman - survivor of 2018 Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School shooting in Parkland, FL Mia Tretta - survivor of 2019 Saugus High School shooting in Santa Clarita, CA Both are now students at Brown University in Providence, RI.
8616306
Michele Avissar-Whiting @madubs.bsky.social · 04/12/2025
My reflexive reaction to this is also "ick". But for the sake of argument, if the LLM's alignment with human decisions could get to 95% - including alignment on stated rationale - would people still insist that this should not be used as a screening tool, even as a first pass?
100
Michele Avissar-Whiting @madubs.bsky.social · 04/12/2025
"...if they are not transparent about what criteria they are feeding into the AI, there will be a backlash from researchers." Like there is full transparency on the criteria being used by the fickle, moody humans currently calling the shots?
120
Michele Avissar-Whiting @madubs.bsky.social · 01/12/2025
I remember when, in 2021, a Fox correspondent compared Fauci to Mengele…same revolting energy.
170
Michele Avissar-Whiting @madubs.bsky.social · 01/12/2025
"Unless research evaluation systems are reformed, even the highest-quality new non-profit journals will face difficulties competing with top-ranking journals in terms of citation metrics and academic prestige."
030
Michele Avissar-Whiting @madubs.bsky.social · 01/12/2025
"Reforms should be implemented in a coordinated and collective manner; otherwise, [those] who depart from journal-based metrics may risk a decline in international rankings, thereby reducing their competitiveness [...]." Ay, there's the rub utppublishing.com/doi/10.3138/...
utppublishing.com
Why the Current Model of Academic Publishing Is Ethically Flawed—and What We Can Do to Change It | Journal of Scholarly Publishing
This article offers a reasoned call for urgent reform of the academic journal publishing system. It focuses on the ethical flaws of the current for-profit model. This model enables the transfer of public funds into the profit margins of private companies that add no meaningful value to research and even limit access to knowledge. The article describes how feedback loops in metrics used in the evaluation of scientific publishing exacerbate structural inequalities and make it difficult to break out of the system. Moreover, the opportunity for easy profit attracts dishonest actors and fuels the rise of predatory journals, which in turn corrodes public trust in science. Without systemic reforms, the current system could also undermine artificial intelligence–driven research outcomes by enabling models to be trained on a growing number of substandard scientific publications. The article concludes with ten specific proposals for action, aimed at stimulating further discussion within and beyond academia.
120
Reposted by Michele Avissar-Whiting
Dan Goodman @neural-reckoning.org · 27/11/2025
Nature Sci Rep publishes incoherent AI slop. eLife publishes a paper which the reviewers didn't agree with, making all the comments and responses public with thoughtful commentary. One of these journals got delisted by Web of Science for quality concerns from not doing peer review. Guess which one?
Two posts from Bluesky. The first one shows a figure from a paper published in Nature Scientific Reports full of totally incoherent AI fabricated gibberish words. The other a comment on a recently published paper by eLife discussing the paper and its peer reviews which were published along with the paper.
415568
Reposted by Michele Avissar-Whiting
Richard Sever @richardsever.bsky.social · 22/11/2025
Image screening is going to fail. We need audit trails for data provenance.
812251