Arguably the biggest source of inefficiency in scientific research is perverse incentives. (See http://online.liebertpub.com/doi/pdf/10.1089/ees.2016.0223) This is a sociological problem rather than a statistical problem.
The research payoff curve is fat-tailed (some research, leads to $10^12, other research leads to -$10^2. This makes traditional optimisation methods dangerous. (Think like a Hollywood Producer or Venture Capitalist rather than a Engine designer. One "hit" can compensate for a hell of a lot of misses.)
Thanks. I don't intend to o consider perverse incentives (I want something that is applicable by individuals).
I would consider the difference in expected payoff of research.
Some thoughts:
- Arguably the biggest source of inefficiency in scientific research is perverse incentives. (See http://online.liebertpub.com/doi/pdf/10.1089/ees.2016.0223) This is a sociological problem rather than a statistical problem.
- The research payoff curve is fat-tailed (some research, leads to $10^12, other research leads to -$10^2. This makes traditional optimisation methods dangerous. (Think like a Hollywood Producer or Venture Capitalist rather than a Engine designer. One "hit" can compensate for a hell of a lot of misses.)
- Once a hypoth
... (read more)