If a paper is being forgotten by the internet, that's a weak signal that it was not valued by its field. If you combine that weak signal with the strong prior, you'd conclude that the paper wasn't a meaningful contribution and can be safely forgotten.
I can see why this mass forgetting is a problem for preservationists and historians of science.
If a paper is being forgotten by the internet, that's a weak signal that it was not valued by its field. If you combine that weak signal with the strong prior, you'd conclude that the paper wasn't a meaningful contribution and can be safely forgotten.
I can see why this mass forgetting is a problem for preservationists and historians of science.
[0] https://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/article?id=10.1371/jo...
[1] e.g. Gordon Allport's "The Nature of Prejudice" was published 1954, has been cited >50,000 times, and is still in print: https://www.amazon.com/Nature-Prejudice-25th-Anniversary/dp/...