Papers



Submit a Paper!

Browse ReproHack papers

  • The Interplay of Time-of-day and Chronotype Results in No General and Robust Cognitive Boost

    Authors: Alodie Rey-Mermet, Nicolas Rothen
    DOI: https://doi.org/10.1525/collabra.88337
    Submitted by areyme      

    Why should we attempt to reproduce this paper?

    In this paper, an R package was used to improve the reproducibility of the analyses. Therefore, it would be good to know to what extent this works. The R package includes the following analyses: (1) data trimming and preparation, (2) descriptive statistics, (3) reliability and correlations, (4) t-tests and Bayesian t-tests, (5) latent-change models (structural equation modeling approach), and (6) multiverse analyses. Furthermore, all deidentified data, experiment codes, research materials, and results are publicly accessible on the Open Science Framework (OSF) at https://osf.io/ngfxv. The study’s design and the analyses were pre-registered on OSF. The preregistration can be accessed at https://osf.io/ tywu7.

  • Measuring the impact of COVID-19 vaccine misinformation on vaccination intent in the UK and USA

    Authors: Sahil Loomba, Alexandre de Figueiredo, Simon J. Piatek, Kristen de Graaf, Heidi J. Larson
    DOI: 10.1038/s41562-021-01056-1
    Submitted by samuelpawel      
      Mean reproducibility score:   7.0/10   |   Number of reviews:   4
    Why should we attempt to reproduce this paper?

    In the middle of the COVID-19 pandemic, this paper provided important evidence regarding the effect of misinformation on vaccination intent. Its analyses and conclusions were extremely important for decision makers. Therefore, it is also important that the analyses are reproducible.

  • Optimizing the Use of Carbonate Standards to Minimize Uncertainties in Clumped Isotope Data

    Authors: Ilja J. Kocken, Inigo A. Müller, Martin Ziegler
    DOI: 10.1029/2019GC008545
    Submitted by japhir      

    Why should we attempt to reproduce this paper?

    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!

  • pyKNEEr: An image analysis workflow for open and reproducible research on femoral knee cartilage

    Authors: Bonaretti S, Gold GE, Beaupre GS
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0226501
    Submitted by hub-admin    
      Mean reproducibility score:   6.5/10   |   Number of reviews:   2
    Why should we attempt to reproduce this paper?

    The paper describes pyKNEEr, a python package for open and reproducible research on femoral knee cartilage using Jupyter notebooks as a user interface. I created this paper with the specific intent to make both the workflows it describes and the paper itself open and reproducible, following guidelines from authorities in the field. Therefore, two things in the paper can be reproduced: 1) workflow results: Table 2 contains links to all the Jupyter notebooks used to calculate the results. Computations are long and might require a server, so if you want to run them locally, I recommend using only 2 or 3 images as inputs for the computations. Also, the paper should be sufficient, but if you need further introductory info, there are a documentation website: https://sbonaretti.github.io/pyKNEEr/ and a "how to" video: https://youtu.be/7WPf5KFtYi8 2) paper graphs: In the captions of figures 1, 4, and 5 you can find links to data repository, code (a Jupyter notebook), and the computational environment (binder) to fully reproduce the graph. These computations can be easily run locally and require a few seconds. All Jupyter notebooks automatically download data from Zenodo and provide dependencies, which should make reproducibility easier.

Search for papers

Filter by tags

Python R GDAL GEOS GIS Shiny PROJ Galaxies Astronomy HPC Databases Binder Social Science Stata make Computer Science Jupyter Notebook tidyverse emacs literate earth sciences clumped isotopes org-mode geology eyetracking LaTeX Git ArcGIS Docker Drake SVN knitr C Matlab Mathematica Meta-analysis swig miniconda tensorflow keras Pandas SQL neuroscience robotics deep learning planner reiforcement learning Plasma physics Hybrid-PIC EPOCH Laser Gamma-ray X-ray radiation Petawatt Fortran plasma PIC physics Monte Carlo Atomistic Simulation LAMMPS Electron Transport DFT descriptors interatomic potentials machine learning Molecular Dynamics Python scripting AIRSS structure prediction density functional theory high-throughput machine-learning RNA bioinformatics CFD Fluid Dynamics OpenFOAM C++ DNS Mathematics Droplets Basilisk Particle-In-Cell psychology Stan Finance SAS Replication crisis Economics Malaria consumer behavior number estimation mental arithmetic psychophysics Archaeology Precipitation Epidemiology Parkrun Health Health Economics HTA plumber science of science Zipf networks city size distribution urbanism literature review Preference Visual Questionnaire Mann-Whitney Correlation Conceptual replication Cognitive psychology Multinomial processing tree (MPT) modeling #urbanism #R k-means cluster analysis city-regions Urban Knowledge Systems Topic modelling Planning Support Systems Software Citation Quarto snakemake Numerical modelling Ocean climate physical oceanography apptainer oceanography R package structural equation modeling bayes factor Forest Simulations Models of forest dynamics multi-lab study mice All tags Clear tags

Key

  Associated with an event
  Available for general review
  Public reviews welcome