-
Authors: David Schindler, Tazin Hossain, Sascha Spors, Frank Krüger
Mean reproducibility score:
9.0/10
|
Number of reviews:
2
Why should we attempt to reproduce this paper?
We spend a lot of time to make our analyses reproducible. A review would allow us to collect some information on whether we are successful with it.
-
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: Alnasir, Jamie, and Hugh P. Shanahan.
Why should we attempt to reproduce this paper?
Metadata annotation is key to reproducibility in sequencing experiments. Reproducing this research using the scripts provided will also show the current level of annotation in years since 2015 when the paper was published.
-
Authors: Atsushi Ebihara, Joel H. Nitta, Yurika Matsumoto, Yuri Fukazawa, Marie Kurihara, Hitomi Yokote, Kaoru Sakuma, Otowa Azakami, Yumiko Hirayama, Ryoko Imaichi
Mean reproducibility score:
10.0/10
|
Number of reviews:
1
Why should we attempt to reproduce this paper?
It uses the drake R package that should make reproducibility of R projects much easier (just run make.R and you're done). However, it does depend on very specific package versions, which are provided by the accompanying docker image.