[achileas]

It's pretty clearly worded to me. That's the trouble with widely releasing research. It's generally (and, IMO, correctly) written in a specific language for a specific audience who can parse this. This is necessary because communicating research has to be extremely precise, but difficult because it requires training.

In my senior year as an undergrad, it would take me 3-5 days to get through a paper and really understand it, and had entire classes that were based around understanding primary literature. In my first year of grad school I was reading dozens of papers in a month. This precise language is needed for replication (despite academic science being structurally unsuited to it) and hi-fidelity idea transmission, but is unsuitable for wider distribution because of the language.

We need more skilled science communicators, not more *arxivs.

[MrBuddyCasino]

I'm not lamenting precise or domain-specific language, this is just an instance of sloppy wording.