We've been working hard behind the scenes, with generous support from the N8 CIR, to make our workflows and infrastructure as reproducible as possible to enable folks to organise and facilitate events as smoothly as possible. So we're extremely excited to share with you what we've been working on, our very own, purpose built ReproHack Hub!
During a ReproHack, participants attempt to reproduce published research of their choice from a list of proposed papers with publicly available associated code and data.
We are all excited by the progress made by authors in making their papers reproducible by publishing associated code and data.
We know how challenging it can be so we want to showcase the value of the practice, both for original authors and as a learning experience for those who attempt to reproduce the work.
It’s important to highlight that our events are by no means an attempt to criticise or discredit work. We see reproduction as beneficial scientific activity in itself, with useful outcomes for authors and valuable learning experiences for the participants and the research community as a whole.
By joining our event, you agree to abide by our Code of Conduct
We invite nominations for papers that have both associated code and data publicly available. We also encourage analyses based on open source tools as we cannot guarantee participants will have access to specialised licenced software.
Join us at the hack to dig into exciting science, learn more about reproducibility, working with other people’s code and data and more!
|10:00||Welcome and Orientation|
|10:10||Ice breaker session in groups|
|10:20||TALK: Dr Esther Plomp: The Turing Way Community.|
|10:45||Tips and Tricks for Reproducing and Reviewing.|
|11:10||Select Papers, Chat and coffee|
|11:30||Round I of ReproHacking (break-out rooms)|
|12:30||Re-group and sharing of experiences|
|13:45||Round II of ReproHacking (break-out rooms)|
|15:00||Round III of ReproHacking (break-out rooms) - Complete Feedback form|
|16:00||TALK: Prof Stephen Eglen: Code Check.|
|16:25||Re-group and sharing of experiences|
|16:50||Feedback and Closing|
We’ll track of discussions and collaborative notes on the event hackpad
As all ReproHack events, we strive to make this event open and inclusive to all. As such the event is governed by the ReproHack Code of Conduct.Please read it before participating. By participating, you are expected to uphold this code.
We encourage authors that are keen and submitting to a specific event, to engage with the event, even just to say hello! You can do so on twitter (check for event specific hashtags or use
@ReproHack) or by
review-chat channel in our
slack group. We’ve
also set up an
authors channel in our
slack group as a
place where you can reach the organisers prior to the hack.
We’ll start with a brief review of the available papers and then form into teams. Feel free to work on your own if you prefer but we highly recommend you discuss your experiences with fellow participants as you work.
Add your details in the participants section of the hackpad so we have a complete list of participants (e.g name, affiliation, social links, pronouns etc).
In your teams, (or individually if you prefer) decide which paper you wish to work on.
Register your team and paper by logging the title of the selected paper and the name(s) of the reviewer(s) in the hackpad. You can use the following template:
### **Paper:** <Title of the paper reproduced> **Reviewers:** Reviewer 1, Reviewer 2 etc.
Follow any instructions/documentation associated with the papers and try and reproduce the work. As you work through your paper, keep in mind the main points on which feedback to the authors will provided, Access, Reproducibility, Documentation and Reusability (see our participant guidelines for more information). It might help to have a look at the Review form before you begin and keep notes during your review. Feel free to use the event hackpad to record general findings you wish to share with the group.
We’ll come together during the day to discuss progress and troubleshoot any sticking points.
Should you finish reproducing your paper quickly, feel free to explore the work more deeply. For example, you could try and run additional analyses, create new plots or even combine materials with your own or other open materials available on the web!
Should you produce any additional materials relating to your reproduction during the session (e.g. a markdown report, jupyter notebook, issue or pull requets in authors repository), feel free to share it publicly and add any links to such materials to the hackpad.
The most important part of the day is recording our experiences as feedback to the authors. Please complete the make sure to complete a Review feedback form for the paper you've selected, ideally, by the end of the day. The lead reviewer (who will submit the review) and any team members wanting to be associated with it will need to create an account on the Hub.
Please also remember to be kind and constructive. Reproducibility is hard and all authors submitting their papers have been incredibly brave. Feel free to browse any public feedback submissions to get inspiration.
You can use the hackpad to take notes and summarise your experiences.
Feel free to contribute any additional thoughts on our collaborative hackpad. These can help form the basis for a blogpost on the event.
Even though the approach in the paper focuses on a specific measurement (clumped isotopes) and how to optimize which and how many standards we use, I hope that the problem is general enough that insight can translate to any kind of measurement that relies on machine calibration. I've committed to writing a literate program (plain text interspersed with code chunks) to explain what is going on and to make the simulations one step at a time. I really hope that this is understandable to future collaborators and scientists in my field, but I have not had any code review internally and I also didn't receive any feedback on it from the reviewers. I would love to see if what in my mind represents "reproducible code" is actually reproducible, and to learn what I can improve for future projects!