-
Authors: Angela I. Renton, Thuy T. Dao, Tom Johnstone, Oren Civier, Ryan P. Sullivan, David J. White, Paris Lyons, Benjamin M. Slade, David F. Abbott, Toluwani J. Amos, Saskia Bollmann, Andy Botting, Megan E. J. Campbell, Jeryn Chang, Thomas G. Close, Monika Dörig, Korbinian Eckstein, Gary F. Egan, Stefanie Evas, Guillaume Flandin, Kelly G. Garner, Marta I. Garrido, Satrajit S. Ghosh, Martin Grignard, Yaroslav O. Halchenko, Anthony J. Hannan, Anibal S. Heinsfeld, Laurentius Huber, Matthew E. Hughes, Jakub R. Kaczmarzyk, Lars Kasper, Levin Kuhlmann, Kexin Lou, Yorguin-Jose Mantilla-Ramos, Jason B. Mattingley, Michael L. Meier, Jo Morris, Akshaiy Narayanan, Franco Pestilli, Aina Puce, Fernanda L. Ribeiro, Nigel C. Rogasch, Chris Rorden, Mark M. Schira, Thomas B. Shaw, Paul F. Sowman, Gershon Spitz, Ashley W. Stewart, Xincheng Ye, Judy D. Zhu, Aswin Narayanan & Steffen Bollmann
Mean reproducibility score:
2.5/10
|
Number of reviews:
2
Why should we attempt to reproduce this paper?
We invested a lot of work to make the analyses from the paper reproducible and we are very curious how the documentation could be improved and if people run into any problems.
-
Authors: Romain Caneill
Fabien Roquet
Gurvan Madec
Jonas Nycander
Mean reproducibility score:
0.0/10
|
Number of reviews:
1
Why should we attempt to reproduce this paper?
I tried hard to make it reproducible, so hopefully this paper can serve as an example on how reproducibility can be achieved.
I think that being reproducible with only few commands to type in a terminal is quite an achievment. At least in my field, where I usually see code published along with paper, but with almost no documentation on how to rerun it.
-
Authors: Clémentine Cottineau
Mean reproducibility score:
8.5/10
|
Number of reviews:
2
Why should we attempt to reproduce this paper?
This article was meant to be entirely reproducible, with the data and code published alongside the article. It is however not embedded within a container (e.g. Docker). Will it past the reproducibility test tomorrow? next year? I'm curious.
-
Authors: Robert A. Smith, Paul P. Schneider, Alice Bullas, Steve Haake, Helen Quirk, Rami Cosulich1, Elizabeth Goyder
Mean reproducibility score:
9.2/10
|
Number of reviews:
5
Why should we attempt to reproduce this paper?
The code and data are both on GitHub. The paper has been published in Wellcome Open Research and has been replicated by multiple other authors.
-
Authors: Asim H. Dar, Adina S. Wagner, Michael Hanke
Submitted by
adswa
Mean reproducibility score:
7.6/10
|
Number of reviews:
5
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.
