what do scientists do when they can't reproduce the

>>8647810
Publish that the other lab was shit.

>>8647819
does this happen often; is it easy to find examples?

sorry for newbie questions

>>8647827

My computer science professor was trying to be helpful and answered a bunch of questions from a grad student from another university.

But it turned out she was asking so many questions because she was writing a paper about how his paper was flawed.

My professor ended up being on the committee to peer review her paper (since he's famous for the topic).

He was a good sport about it and appreciated that research was happening. He just asked her to be more forthcoming in the future.

>>8647810
invent post-anabelian froeboid geometrics

>>8647810
Contact the other lab and explain the issues we are having. You can spot genuine results because they're usually really enthusiastic about helping you.

>>8647876
I would straight piss myself if I was her during that review. There would not be a single intelligible word coming out my mouth

>>8647876
>>8648420
What's actually scary is that he could have been an asshole and just blackball her with practically zero repercussions.

>>8647810
shitpost on /sci/

>Errors with fMRI analyses:
>expected: 5%
>found: 70%
http://www.pnas.org/content/113/28/7900.abstract

>More than 70% of researchers have tried and failed to reproduce another scientist's experiments, and more than half have failed to reproduce their own experiments.
>Science
http://www.nature.com/news/1-500-scientists-lift-the-lid-on-reproducibility-1.19970

I can't even reproduce my own results sometimes.

>>8647827
Check out Natural Product Structural revision papers. It happens reasonably often.

>>8647810
R U N D O W N
U
N
D
O
W
N

>>8647810
Can I get a slow walk up on these two?

Can I get a quick rundown on these guys?

>>8649328
>>8649398
>>8649420

French physicist twins who produced semi-junky paper and now have weird chins because of too much plastic surgery.

>>8647876
I tip my hat at your professor.

>>8649048
>sometimes
that's not very accurate description, could you be more precise on this matter?

>>8649435
Don't insult them just because you can't understand their paper.

>>8649579

Uh-uh... They are Gods with Godlike chins? Is that better? Are your autistic needs satisfied?

>>8649435
Did you just unironically give me a quick rundown?