Last active
March 20, 2023 22:02
-
-
Save daaronr/dafd5517a91270add9e1156aec094b17 to your computer and use it in GitHub Desktop.
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
| Category_abbrev | Rating_1 | Confidence_range_1 | Rating_2 | Confidence_range_2 | Rating_3 | Confidence_range_3 | Comments_1 | Comments_2 | Comments_3 | Category_described | Title | Eval_1 | Eval_2 | Eval_3 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Overall | 80 | (70, 90) | 80 | 4 | 79 | (59,94) | Excellent as an overview, and important for global health, but unfortunately somewhat disappointing about ways to address global catastrophic risks. [EditorÕs note: the evaluator has explained that they have not based their assessment on this point; we do not intend Ê'Relevance to Global Priorities" to factor into the overall assessment) | Overall assessment | Advance Market Commitments: Insights from Theory and Experience | David Manheim | Dan Tortorice | Joel Tan | |||
| Adv. Knowl. | 25 | (20,40) | 90 | 5 | 90 | (70, 100) | This was a review, not intended to directly advance knowledge. To the extent that it claims additional usefulness of AMCs, it seems not to have addressed other options. | Advancing knowledge and practice | Advance Market Commitments: Insights from Theory and Experience | David Manheim | Dan Tortorice | Joel Tan | |||
| Methods | 95 | (85,97.5) | 80 | 4 | 70 | (50,90) | Within the limited scope, the paper covered everything that would be expected regarding AMCs thoroughly. | Methods: Justification, reasonableness, validity, robustness | Advance Market Commitments: Insights from Theory and Experience | David Manheim | Dan Tortorice | Joel Tan | |||
| Logic & Comm. | 75 | (60,90) | 80 | 4 | 70 | (50,90) | The implicit assumptions that resulted from the limited scope undermine some of the claimed usefulness of AMCs | Logic & communication | Advance Market Commitments: Insights from Theory and Experience | David Manheim | Dan Tortorice | Joel Tan | |||
| Collab. | 90 | 3 | 50 | (30,70) | The paper used data appropriately, but seems to have noÊ ability to fulfill this criteria. [EditorÕs comment: Some of the data and code they used in their simple empirical exercise could be made available.] | Open, collaborative, replicable | Advance Market Commitments: Insights from Theory and Experience | David Manheim | Dan Tortorice | Joel Tan | |||||
| Real-world | 90 | (70, 100) | Engaging with real-world, impact quantification; practice, realism, and relevance | Advance Market Commitments: Insights from Theory and Experience | David Manheim | Dan Tortorice | Joel Tan | ||||||||
| Relevance | 60 | (40,75) | 95 | 3 | 90 | (70, 100) | While AMCs are a critical tool for global health, and should be used more widely, other approaches which are not discussed seem more appropriate for the most critical future biological risks. | Relevance to global priorities | Advance Market Commitments: Insights from Theory and Experience | David Manheim | Dan Tortorice | Joel Tan | |||
| Qual. Journal | 3 | (2.5, 4.5) | 4 | 5 | 5 | 5 | The paper seems (counterfactually) very likely to get accepted by a mid-tier journal, even if only due to the authors, and is moderately likely to be accepted into a better journal. | Published in AER P&P | What âquality journalâ do you expect this work will be published in? Note: 0= lowest/none, 5= highest/best | Advance Market Commitments: Insights from Theory and Experience | David Manheim | Dan Tortorice | Joel Tan | ||
| Journal Scale | 4 | 5 | 5 | 5 | On a âscale of journalsâ, what âquality of journalâ should this be published in? Note: 0= lowest/none, 5= highest/best | Advance Market Commitments: Insights from Theory and Experience | David Manheim | Dan Tortorice | Joel Tan |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment