5 ms·
If you saw the code academics and students write, you'd know why they don't want to publish it. Also, more likely and non- nefarious, but no less harmful, t
by ACow_Adonis 7y ago
If you saw the code academics and students write, you'd know why they don't want to publish it.
Also, more likely and non- nefarious, but no less harmful, there's just an academic culture that says "this is what a paper looks like and this is what it contains". Moving from this pattern increases the odds you'll not be published, and it would also likely result in a scandal when someone uses it to point out that the peers in peer review are neither peers (they can't read nor understand nor test the code) nor reviewing (they won't actually put resources into code review).
- DennisP 7y agoSorta makes you wonder whether this messy, poorly-tested, unreviewed code is correctly implementing the algorithms they think they're testing.
- thom 7y agoIn my experience, not reliably. And when following up something suspicious, you'll hear "I don't know, I didn't write that".
- krick 7y agoThat's only more the reason why they have to publish it.
- ACow_Adonis 7y agoOh I don't wonder :) After a few years experience with analysis you sometimes see certain patterns in papers which strongly suggest bugs you've experienced, phenomenon in the data set you're already familiar with, and hacking/overfitting. And some of the languages are specifically designed to keep running and produce wrong results rather than crash and abort: a cynical man might say this is a feature not a bug and that's why they're popular. As a non-wealthy, non-academic, this isn't a battle I'm interested in fighting directly. There are other hills I'd rather die on :)