If you’re sent a paper to review, remember that you make choices. Choices of which papers to review and why, choices of which standards to apply and why. Rigorous peer review is one of the bedrocks of our field. Where we, as the reviewing community, draw our lines, is where the lines get drawn.

Show Post

THIS IS GROSS. I'm disappointed that arXiv even allowed this, this is not science, this is slop. (Also, who "endorsed" this author so they could submit to astro-PH in the first place?? Because I'm also disappointed in that person.)

Show Post

Likely the most important thing I've ever written — if you're an academic and the AI mania unsettles you, here's my best shot at presenting some intellectual tools that might help you articulate why. arxiv.org/abs/2610.27251

Show Post

We're hiring! Two postdoc posts in the Quantum Software Lab at Edinburgh to develop foundations and tools for hybrid quantum-classical programming. Use categorical semantics to give quantum programs meaning, and turn that into compilers and optimisations: elxw.fa.em3.oraclecloud.com/hcmUI/Candid...

Show Post

Ten years after the first neural-quantum-states preprint, Giuseppe Carleo and the EPFL Computational Quantum Science Lab launched Ketworks: a community wiki plus a leaderboard of variational energies, each checked against the arXiv paper it came from. Open to edits. ketworks.org

Show Post