Dr Oliver Doyle

@oliverdoyle.bsky.social

Early career musicologist, part-time tenor and harpsichordist. Director musicaantica.org.uk, teaching and admin at Royal Academy of Music. Ex-doctoral researcher, ‘Sounding the Bookshelf 1501: Music in a year of Italian Printed Books’.

When I pointed out King’s will lose 90% of its AHRC student-led places under the new scheme, I got piled on by the AHRC Chair claiming I was wrong and scaremongering. It wasn’t quite 90%. This year King’s students got 27 AHRC student-led scholarships. Next year they’re giving us 3. So 89% then.

Margot Finn@eicathomefinn.bsky.social · last yr.

'The number of student-initiated PhD scholarships funded by the Arts and Humanities Research Council (AHRC) is set to fall by 60 per cent when new doctoral training arrangements come into effect next year, new figures show.' 1/3

Ridiculous new toy given what I actually need is a new harpsichord, but very grateful to Glenn Braun, who makes instruments that are usually wholly unaffordable accessible - in this case a lira da braccio, one of the go-to instruments for self-accompanied singing in the 15th century!

Bild

Prince William made £22.9M last year. But he won’t say how much tax he paid. What is he trying to hide? We fund the monarchy, so the least we deserve is transparency. ✍️ Sign the petition if you agree:

Reform has lost 11 councillors and 2 MPs in a matter of months… and when I say ‘lost’ I mean, they’ve quit following rows, impropriety or inability to do their jobs. So, if Brexit weren’t proof enough, then this barrelling shitshow should confirm forever that they should be nowhere near govt.

'AI-generated reviews often suffer from five key weaknesses. They rely on vague...language. They misrepresent the paper’s scope....They flag issues that have already been addressed. They exhibit inconsistent or contradictory logic. And they lack the...nuance of a thoughtful human reviewer.' 1/2

My paper was probably reviewed by AI – and that’s a serious problem

Our paper was rejected on the basis of reviewer comments that were vague, formulaic, often irrelevant and occasionally inaccurate, says Seongjin Hong

timeshighereducation.com