3 ms·
> Yes, it can be worthwhile learning by reimplementing from a high-level description -- I've done it a lot -- but that doesn't excuse making replication difficu
by burntsushi 13y ago
> Yes, it can be worthwhile learning by reimplementing from a high-level description -- I've done it a lot -- but that doesn't excuse making replication difficult.
I don't understand what you're trying to achieve by saying this. Did I somehow imply that people should be excused for not making their work reasonably reproducible?
It my sub-field, it is utterly ridiculous to expect to reproduce work by running `git clone && make` or by getting a prepared VM. Computational biologists are not known for their systems or software skills.
- abecedarius 13y agoWell, the context here is discussion of the problem of unreplicable research. I do get the impression (including from your post and reply) that computational biologists need to get their act together on that front; see http://ivory.idyll.org/blog/ http://ivory.idyll.org/blog/ for one researcher in that field who sometimes blogs on this theme.
- burntsushi 13y agoIndeed, we do need to get our act together. I'm still just starting, but I have a couple of ideas on proactive things I can do, but it's an uphill battle. Thanks for that link---it's always nice to see other people in the field concerned with this. There aren't enough of them.
- abecedarius 13y agoGood luck! I know it's a big task to change the culture (and I didn't mean to imply I thought it'd be easy). You might like http://michaelnielsen.org/blog/reinventing-discovery/ http://michaelnielsen.org/blog/reinventing-discovery/ too.