計劃進修PhD/Research討論區(17) Windows JJ快d backup

傳教士谷哥 2017-5-16 14:12:33

:^(

:^(

:^(

:^(

:^(

不明所以 2017-5-16 14:17:02

:^(

:^(

:^(

:^(

婆你呀麼彈彈波 2017-5-16 14:17:16

:^(

:^(

:^(

:^(

:^(

:^(

傳教士谷哥 2017-5-16 14:22:15

:^(

:^(

:^(

:^(

:^(

:^(

一言筆發 2017-5-16 14:43:53

:^(

:^(

:^(

:^(

Adam_Smith 2017-5-16 14:57:09

:^(

:^(

:^(

:^(

:^(

卡利古拉 2017-5-16 15:29:33

:^(

:^(

:^(

:^(

:^(

:^(

:^(

不明所以 2017-5-16 16:02:23

:^(

:^(

:^(

:^(

Adam_Smith 2017-5-16 16:05:03

:^(

:^(

:^(

:^(

:^(

傳教士谷哥 2017-5-16 16:05:49

:^(

:^(

:^(

:^(

:^(

Adam_Smith 2017-5-16 16:24:16

我一陣得閒organize下個word檔

Thanks michael巴

:^(

用table?

:^(

DrPhysics🤓 2017-5-16 16:38:59 錯到九彩，Peer Review 完全無用。

"The error isn’t just an isolated typo: ‘neuropeptide’ occurs 27 times in the paper, while the correct terms for the non-peptides are never used.

I’m amazed that this snafu made it through peer review. It’s a simple mistake; presumably whoever wrote the paper saw oxytocin and vasopressin referred to as “neuropeptides” and thought that the term was a generic one meaning “signalling molecule.” That kind of mistake could happen to anyone, so we shouldn’t be too harsh on the authors, but expert peer review is supposed to catch such issues. It clearly failed in this case."

http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/neuroskeptic/2017/05/08/neuropeptides-peer-review/#.WRq6JqNh1UP

DrPhysics🤓 2017-5-16 16:41:03

:^(

:^(

:^(

:^(

:^(

:^(

DrPhysics🤓 2017-5-16 16:42:02

:^(

:^(

:^(

:^(

:^(

:^(

:^(

:^(

一言筆發 2017-5-16 16:49:17

錯到九彩，Peer Review 完全無用。

"The error isn’t just an isolated typo: ‘neuropeptide’ occurs 27 times in the paper, while the correct terms for the non-peptides are never used.

I’m amazed that this snafu made it through peer review. It’s a simple mistake; presumably whoever wrote the paper saw oxytocin and vasopressin referred to as “neuropeptides” and thought that the term was a generic one meaning “signalling molecule.” That kind of mistake could happen to anyone, so we shouldn’t be too harsh on the authors, but expert peer review is supposed to catch such issues. It clearly failed in this case."

http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/neuroskeptic/2017/05/08/neuropeptides-peer-review/#.WRq6JqNh1UP

:^(

卡利古拉 2017-5-16 16:51:33

錯到九彩，Peer Review 完全無用。

"The error isn’t just an isolated typo: ‘neuropeptide’ occurs 27 times in the paper, while the correct terms for the non-peptides are never used.

I’m amazed that this snafu made it through peer review. It’s a simple mistake; presumably whoever wrote the paper saw oxytocin and vasopressin referred to as “neuropeptides” and thought that the term was a generic one meaning “signalling molecule.” That kind of mistake could happen to anyone, so we shouldn’t be too harsh on the authors, but expert peer review is supposed to catch such issues. It clearly failed in this case."

http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/neuroskeptic/2017/05/08/neuropeptides-peer-review/#.WRq6JqNh1UP

:^(

:^(

Michaelzaki 2017-5-16 17:06:21

我一陣得閒organize下個word檔

Thanks michael巴
:^(
用table?
:^(

我都唔知點搞我得閒再整

:^(

可能下個禮拜搭飛機無聊個陣搞

:^(

Adam_Smith 2017-5-16 17:10:59

我一陣得閒organize下個word檔

Thanks michael巴
:^(
用table?
:^(

我都唔知點搞我得閒再整
:^(

:^(

可能下個禮拜搭飛機無聊個陣搞
:^(

等你約

:^(

我沒有放棄 2017-5-16 17:24:14

我一陣得閒organize下個word檔

Thanks michael巴
:^(
用table?
:^(

我都唔知點搞我得閒再整
:^(

:^(

可能下個禮拜搭飛機無聊個陣搞
:^(

等你約
:^(

:^(

婆你呀麼彈彈波 2017-5-16 17:30:52

:^(

:^(

:^(

:^(

:^(

:^(

:^(

雙失廢柴 2017-5-16 18:18:06

:^(

:^(

:^(

:^(

:^(

:^(

:^(

:^(

我沒有放棄 2017-5-16 18:48:49

:^(

:^(

:^(

:^(

:^(

:^(

:^(

:^(

:^(

鎂鋁磷硫碳 2017-5-16 18:49:50

:^(

:^(

:^(

:^(

:^(

Michaelzaki 2017-5-16 18:51:53

我一陣得閒organize下個word檔

Thanks michael巴
:^(
用table?
:^(

我都唔知點搞我得閒再整
:^(

:^(

可能下個禮拜搭飛機無聊個陣搞
:^(

等你約
:^(

你去你度搵你

:^(