Papers



Submit a Paper!

Browse ReproHack papers

  • REMoDNaV: robust eye-movement classification for dynamic stimulation

    Authors: Asim H. Dar, Adina S. Wagner, Michael Hanke
    DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-020-01428-x
    Submitted by adswa    
      Mean reproducibility score:   7.0/10   |   Number of reviews:   2
    Why should we attempt to reproduce this paper?

    In theory, reproducing this paper should only require a clone of a public Git repository, and the execution of a Makefile (detailed in the README of the paper repository at https://github.com/psychoinformatics-de/paper-remodnav). We've set up our paper to be dynamically generated, retrieving and installing the relevant data and software automatically, and we've even created a tutorial about it, so that others can reuse the same setup for their work. Nevertheless, we've for example never tried it out across different operating systems - who knows whether it works on Windows? We'd love to share the tips and tricks we found to work, and even more love feedback on how to improve this further.

  • The viewing angle in AGN SED models, a data-driven analysis

    Authors: Andrés Felipe Ramos Padilla, Lingyu Wang, Katarzyna Małek, Andreas Efstathiou, Guang Yang
    Submitted by aframosp    
      Mean reproducibility score:   9.0/10   |   Number of reviews:   1
    Why should we attempt to reproduce this paper?

    Most of the material is available through Jupyter notebooks in GitHub, and it should be easy to reproduce with the help of Binder. With the notebooks, you could experiment with different parameters to the ones analyzed in the paper. It also contains a large dataset of physical parameters of galaxies analysed in this work. We expect this work to be easily reproducible in the steps described in the repository.

  • Finding Efficient Trade-offs in Multi-Fidelity Response Surface Modeling

    Authors: Sander van Rijn, Sebastian Schmitt, Matthijs van Leeuwen, Thomas Bäck
    Submitted by sjvrijn    
      Mean reproducibility score:   9.0/10   |   Number of reviews:   1
    Why should we attempt to reproduce this paper?

    Because: - Two fellow PhDs working on different topics have been able to reproduce some figures by following the README instructions and I hope this extends to other people - I've tried to incorporate as many of the best practices as possible to make my code and data open and accessible - I've tried to make sure that my data is exactly reproducible with the specified random seed strategy - the paper suggests a method that should be useful to other researchers in my field, which is not useful unless my results are reproducible

  • Determination of the fundamental absorption and optical bandgap of dielectric thin films from single optical transmittance measurements

    Authors: A. Tejada, L. Montañez, C. Torres, P. Llontop, L. Flores-Escalante, F. De Zela, A. Winnacker, and J. A. Guerra
    Submitted by hub-admin    

    Why should we attempt to reproduce this paper?

    We propose a simple method to retrieve optical constants from single optical transmittance measurements, in particular in the fundamental absorption region. The construction of needed envelopes is arbitrary and will depend on the user. However, the method should still be robust and deliver similar results.

  • Algorithm configuration data mining for CMA evolution strategies

    Authors: Sander van Rijn, Hao Wang, Bas van Stein, Thomas Bäck
    DOI: 10.1145/3071178.3071205
    Submitted by sjvrijn    
      Mean reproducibility score:   10.0/10   |   Number of reviews:   1
    Why should we attempt to reproduce this paper?

    The original data took quite a while to produce for a previous paper, but for this paper, all tables and figures should be exactly reproducible by simply running the jupyter notebook.

  • Population structure and phenotypic variation of Sclerotinia sclerotiorum from dry bean (Phaseolus vulgaris) in the United States

    Authors: Kamvar ZN, Amaradasa BS, Jhala R, McCoy S, Steadman JR, Everhart SE
    DOI: 10.7717/peerj.4152
    Submitted by hub-admin    
      Mean reproducibility score:   6.0/10   |   Number of reviews:   1
    Why should we attempt to reproduce this paper?

    This paper is reproduced weekly in a docker container on continuous integration, but it is also set up to work via local installs as well. It would be interesting to see if it's reproducible with a human operator who knows nothing of the project or toolchain.

    Tags: R make Docker
  • Bayesian determination of the effect of a deep eutectic solvent on the structure of lipid monolayers

    Authors: "McCluskey, Andrew R. and Sanchez-Fernandez, Adrian and Edler, Karen J. and Parker, Stephen C. and Jackson, Andrew J. and Campbell, Richard A. and Arnold, Thomas
    DOI: DOI https://doi.org/10.1039/C9CP00203K
    Submitted by hub-admin    
      Mean reproducibility score:   8.5/10   |   Number of reviews:   2
    Why should we attempt to reproduce this paper?

    I believe this represents the only example of a reproducible paper from scattering data collected at Diamond Light Source (UK) and the Institute Laue-Langevin (France)

    Tags: Python make