Stripy guide 2014

Chronological list of posts related to the stripy controversy on this blog. Posts tagged *** are “must read” although of course you should read everything. For what happens outside of rapha-z-lab, see list of links here.

23/11/2012

***

Stripy Nanoparticles Revisited; First blog post following the publication of our peer reviewed article in Small.The post is still a good intro to the controversy.

Includes a video highlighting a problem with the 2004 paper – one that requires no technical knowledge to understand, only common sense.

25/11/2012

Responding to the response ?That post is a bit more technical but go the comments section where we meet a very keen  anonymous stripy supporter, Pep,  who turns out to be an Editor at Nature Materials.

02/12/2012

Seeing is believing? Not always… Philip Moriarty catches the stripy fever and offers his first guest blog… and a first structured criticism of the response to stripy revisited.

06/12/2012

Scientific claims should be supported by experimental evidence [1, 2, 3]In a series of three posts, I stress one aspect which I (still) find particularly amazing; the publication in respected journals of claims which are not supported by any evidence. Here, no need for debates about interpretation of data because there is no data.

10/12/2012

Gaping holes in the gap Cho et al reported the “Ultrasensitive detection of toxic cations through changes in the tunnelling current across films of striped nanoparticles” in the last issue of Nature Materials. I explain why I am not convinced.

11/12/2012

***

Seven years of imaging artifacts: What gives?Guest post by Predrag Djuranovic.His demonstration that stripes are an artifact dates back from 2005… when he was a graduate student in Stellacci’s lab.

17/12/2012

Letter to Nature Materials, July 2009The letter to the Editor that accompanied our submission of “Stripy Nanoparticles Revisited” to Nature Materials in 2009; excerpt from final paragraph: “The possibility of refuting existing data and theories is an important condition of progress of scientific knowledge.” The manuscript was rejected.

18/12/2012

Scientific controversy is healthyIn response to an update at Doug Natelson’s blog

20/12/2012

Stripy timelineA timeline of the stripy story (mainly, publications) from 2004 to the publication of stripy revisited at the end of 2012; needs to be updated with more recent events.

02/01/2013

Response to “On my [Pep Pamies] comments on Lévy’s blog”Philip Moriarty responds to Pep Pamies apology.

03/01/2013

Nature Materials peer view of stripy revisited (July to September 2009) – confidential… or not?Should I publish these comments from peers?

23/01/2013

Insoluble contradictionWhere we first mention data re-use on this blog.

04/03/2013

***

Request for raw data: author’s and editors’ responsesGuest post by Philip Moriarty; where we first encounter the issue of data sharing.

05/03/2013

***

Three months of stripy nanoparticles controversySummary of the scientific contributions expressed on my blog and elsewhere

12/03/2013

http://storify.com/raphavisses/an-eventful-week-in-the-stripy-controversyAn eventful week and my first storify

22/03/2013

***

Five cases of data re-useEvidence of data re-use is shown and communicated to the relevant institutions. EPFL considered, then, closed the case. Two corrections, one at PNAS, one at Nature Materials, ensued. The most seriously affected article,  JSPM 4, 24–35, 2009,  however stands uncorrected (because the Editor does not think he can do anything about it). Do not pay $113 + tax for that article, seriously.

23/04/2013

Nature Publishing Group new editorial policies reality checkWhere I point out the distance between theory and practice at NPG…

30/04/2013

Update on Nature Publishing Group reality checkWhere theory and practice are happily reconciled.

17/05/2013

Some stripy nanoparticle raw data released todayGood.

18/05/2013

Where’s Wally?Where the challenge of going from the released raw data to the published figure becomes apparent. Kudos to Julian Stirling (below) who will do herculean efforts to bridge that gap.

22/05/2013

Data re-use update

28/05/2013

***

Browsing the archivePhilip Moriarty thanks Francesco Stellacci for releasing the raw data but is not impressed. Comparison of unprocessed data and published figures is illuminating. Philip also shows how the stripes can be easily generated and turned on/off by the feedback loop gain.

04/07/2013

The Fast Fourier Transform of an array of lines is?A long overdue post about Fourier transform, read if you like Fourier transform.

22/08/2013

Are simulations more messy than experiments? (I need help…)On nanoparticles penetration through membranes, theory and experiment; great comment, thanks!

20/09/2013

The power of images & cartoons: Stripy NP, 2004-2013My first reaction to the 2013 ACS Nano paper. Much better responses (by others) to follow

12/11/2013

***

And yet there are stripes!Guest post by Mathias Brust. Response to the 2013 ACS Nano and Langmuir papers.  Short. Excellent. Just go and read it.

14/11/2013

***

The Emperor’s new stripesGuest post by Philip Moriarty. Response to the 2013 ACS Nano and Langmuir papers.  Short (by Philip’s standard). Go and read it too.

15/11/2013

***

Where are the stripes?Guest post by Quanmin Guo. Response to the 2013 ACS Nano and Langmuir papers.Yes, you must read this one as well…

Then, if you have time, tell me why the obvious question that Mathias, Philip and Quanmin ask, i.e. “where have the stripes gone?” has not worried the editors and reviewers of those papers.

27/11/2013

The stripy controversy as a window into the scientific process*Does science self-correct? hmmm…

26/12/2013

***

Open science to settle stripy controversy?Guest post by Julian Stirling, announcing that his/our paper is now on arXiv. He also explains our choice of complete openness and tell his experience of trawling through the stripy data.

09/01/2014

Why we are very unlikely to see an admission that the 2004 paper is based on an artifact, let alone retracted

12/01/2014

***

Wither stripesGuest post by Philip MoriartyQuote from the comments sections (Nony): “Killer post”

I could not say better.

Advertisements

6 comments

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s