Sign in

Mathïs Fédérico

@mathisfederico.bsky.social
15 followers 28 following 7 posts

Rethinking the scientific system

PostsRepliesMedia
Mathïs Fédérico @mathisfederico.bsky.social · 03/10/2026
I don't think LLMs poor judgement are a replacement for actual scientists yet. Still we should design a scientific system to be 'machine compatible', because it will allow exactly to measure how 'good' these AI scientists are, and profit from it when it gets good, unlike the publication system.
000
Reposted by Mathïs Fédérico
Modular Interoperable Research Attribution @mira.science · 24/09/2026
Notes from our kick-off workshop in Ireland this June 🍀 @scios.tech worked with @discoursegraphs.bsky.social to facilitate a fantastic workshop of 20+ researchers, technologists, and open science leaders to design and build a new modular medium for research! Participating people/orgs >
mira.science
What we built at the MIRA Kickoff
Four days in Ireland. Three user stories. Six working prototypes, a tested schema, and the demos to show for it.
1188
Mathïs Fédérico @mathisfederico.bsky.social · 24/09/2026
To everyone that says Goodhart's law is reason to not measure scientific progress. If you blind yourself, you accept to rely on feelings, reputation, and social power dynamics. Measures allows to ground decisions in reality. Building good measurement tools is what science is suppose to do.
000
Mathïs Fédérico @mathisfederico.bsky.social · 23/09/2026
AI in science is not the problem, just like any other tool. Incentives given by considering papers as unit of work and journals and citations as measure of quality are the direct cause of the current enshitification of science. AI just amplified the means to follow incentives blindly.
000
Mathïs Fédérico @mathisfederico.bsky.social · 22/09/2026
Filtering academic works is not only futile, it also drives bad incentives. Whenever there is a filter, a KPI becomes maximising the number of works that passes the filter. Thus quantity over quality, strain on the filter, and you end up exactly in our current peer-review situation.
010
Mathïs Fédérico @mathisfederico.bsky.social · 22/06/2026
Scientific publications are mistaken for valuable outputs, a consequence on relying on peer-review for quality control. The true evaluation of research starts AFTER publication. Did the research produce any evidence that actually changed minds or reinforced our beliefs? If not what have you done?
000
Mathïs Fédérico @mathisfederico.bsky.social · 04/05/2026
We need to change perspective to fix our broken scientific system. Thank you Michael Horn for the invitation to share my view in his great podcast The Future of Education! It's about time we optimize for true #ScientificProgress, not papers, but #ChangeMinds being #EvidenceBased.
linkedin.com
What if the peer-review process isn’t just slow but optimizing for the wrong thing? I spoke with Mathïs Fédérico, founder of Bycelium, about what he sees as a fundamental flaw in academic research:… ...
What if the peer-review process isn’t just slow but optimizing for the wrong thing? I spoke with Mathïs Fédérico, founder of Bycelium, about what he sees as a fundamental flaw in academic research: t...
010
Mathïs Fédérico @mathisfederico.bsky.social · 26/01/2026
As young scientist you will have to choose: #Academia? Face the <5% tenure probability, fight for grants and prestige over papers publication. #Industry? Please your hierarchy and stakeholders, but for substantial reward. I choose the hard path to #RethinkScience. And you what will you do?
The penguin meme image with the colony replaced by Academia, the feeding ground replaced by Industry, and finally the mountains replaced by Revolutionize Science.
081