/sci/ - Science & Math

>>11682258
So maybe a more tangible example here

https://vixra.org/pdf/2004.0117v1.pdf
>Remark 3.3: Eqs. 3.3.1.2, ..2.2, ..3.2, and ..4.2 as rendered are not tautologous and
not equivalent in pairs of states for light on or light off, refuting the definition of
Bayesian network. This further denies the conjecture for structural equations and
causal models.

This person goes through various texts and make screenshots or types it off, enumerates the propositions (even if the original text doesn't have an enumeration) and then writes a line or two about how in their logic or approach, the claims made in those texts (say something about Bayesian networks here, but no math subject is save) is "refuted."
It's really scary.