Peer Review Is the Least Articulable Field: Five Findings on Tacit Knowledge
sanmikoyejo · x · 2026-10-29
Core findings from Alexander Spangaro's paper (with Diyi Yang, Sanmi Koyejo, Noah Goodman et al.): (1) all measured fields show articulability gaps, including traditionally verifiable ones like math and coding; (2) qualitative fields like creative writing are harder to articulate; (3) surprisingly, academic peer review involves the most inarticulable decision-making, surviving all confound checks — with implications for automated scientific discovery; (4) a Goodhart-like tradeoff: the more you articulate preferences, the less tacit component you capture; (5) effects survive subfield quantification controls.
More from AGI Musings
- AI Software Factory vs Dark Factory: two stages of autonomous software delivery — Pavan_Belagatti · 2026-10-29
- 'AI is just a tool' misses the point: writing and print reshaped humans too — YogeshMalik · 2026-10-29
- Why a multibillion-dollar law firm can go bankrupt: lawyer friends explain the economics — NathanpmYoung · 2026-10-29
- Dating app Rivet shows voters AI-blended faces of matches, making facial ranking bias visible — organic_ta6 · 2026-10-29
- AI macro forecasting through Lucas and Hayek: infinite regress vs the price system — danielrock · 2026-10-29
- Robotics experts push back on GPT-7-Robot hype: LLMs are 100x larger than VLAs — silver__tsuki · 2026-10-29