Downloads provided by UsageCounts
Serendipity or “discovery by chance” is an ubiquitous phenomenon in scientific research and innovation. However in science funding the role of randomness is usually ignored. This produces often conformism and promotes a naif meritocracy which does not foster innovative ideas. In this talk I will discuss a simple agent-based model [1,2] that shows that, if it is true that some degree of talent is necessary to be successful in life/science, almost never the most talented people reach the highest peaks of success, being overtaken by averagely talented but sensibly luckier individuals. This counterintuitive result sheds new light on the effectiveness of assessing merit and resources only on the basis of the past reached level of success. I will also compare several policy hypotheses to show the most efficient strategies for distributing public funds for research, aiming to improve real meritocracy, diversity of ideas and innovation. References [1] A Pluchino, AE Biondo, A Rapisarda, Talent versus luck: The role of randomness in success and failure, Advances in Complex systems 21 (03n04), 1850014 [2] D Challet, A Pluchino, AE Biondo, A Rapisarda, The origins of extreme wealth inequality in the talent versus luck model, Advances in Complex Systems 23 (02), 2050004
Conference title: Peer Review Under Review Acronym: peerreview23 Dates: February 6 - 10, 2023 Place: ESO Garching, Germany Website: https://www.eso.org/sci/meetings/2023/PRUR.html
{"references": ["A Pluchino, AE Biondo, A Rapisarda, Talent versus luck: The role of randomness in success and failure, Advances in Complex systems 21 (03n04), 1850014"]}
random strategies, research funding, innovation
random strategies, research funding, innovation
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 0 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Average | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Average | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Average |
| views | 41 | |
| downloads | 37 |

Views provided by UsageCounts
Downloads provided by UsageCounts