Thorp may say that "correction is courageous" but his AAAS journals have eliminated the form of paper (Technical Comment) by which journals traditionally corrected plain errors post-publication. This indefensible policy decision was made pre-Covid. It indicates a general indifference to helping readers find the truth. That doesn't seem to be part of the AAAS business model.
Although the decision predated Covid, it has proved convenient in protecting the two key zoonosis papers (Worobey et al. and Pekar et al.) from the withering criticism they deserve. The Pekar et al. paper in particular has been shown to have multiple mathematical errors whose correction reverses its conclusion. Science belatedly published a correction of only a fraction of these errors. For the rest of the corrections one must turn to the independent pubpeer post-publication discussion site. Discussions of the serious problems with the Worobey paper may be found in papers in the J. Royal Statistical Society, Series A.
Thorp may say that "correction is courageous" but his AAAS journals have eliminated the form of paper (Technical Comment) by which journals traditionally corrected plain errors post-publication. This indefensible policy decision was made pre-Covid. It indicates a general indifference to helping readers find the truth. That doesn't seem to be part of the AAAS business model.
Although the decision predated Covid, it has proved convenient in protecting the two key zoonosis papers (Worobey et al. and Pekar et al.) from the withering criticism they deserve. The Pekar et al. paper in particular has been shown to have multiple mathematical errors whose correction reverses its conclusion. Science belatedly published a correction of only a fraction of these errors. For the rest of the corrections one must turn to the independent pubpeer post-publication discussion site. Discussions of the serious problems with the Worobey paper may be found in papers in the J. Royal Statistical Society, Series A.