Cargando…
CODECHECK: an Open Science initiative for the independent execution of computations underlying research articles during peer review to improve reproducibility
The traditional scientific paper falls short of effectively communicating computational research. To help improve this situation, we propose a system by which the computational workflows underlying research articles are checked. The CODECHECK system uses open infrastructure and tools and can be int...
Autores principales: | , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
F1000 Research Limited
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8311796/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34367614 http://dx.doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.51738.2 |
_version_ | 1783729031299989504 |
---|---|
author | Nüst, Daniel Eglen, Stephen J. |
author_facet | Nüst, Daniel Eglen, Stephen J. |
author_sort | Nüst, Daniel |
collection | PubMed |
description | The traditional scientific paper falls short of effectively communicating computational research. To help improve this situation, we propose a system by which the computational workflows underlying research articles are checked. The CODECHECK system uses open infrastructure and tools and can be integrated into review and publication processes in multiple ways. We describe these integrations along multiple dimensions (importance, who, openness, when). In collaboration with academic publishers and conferences, we demonstrate CODECHECK with 25 reproductions of diverse scientific publications. These CODECHECKs show that asking for reproducible workflows during a collaborative review can effectively improve executability. While CODECHECK has clear limitations, it may represent a building block in Open Science and publishing ecosystems for improving the reproducibility, appreciation, and, potentially, the quality of non-textual research artefacts. The CODECHECK website can be accessed here: https://codecheck.org.uk/. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8311796 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | F1000 Research Limited |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-83117962021-08-05 CODECHECK: an Open Science initiative for the independent execution of computations underlying research articles during peer review to improve reproducibility Nüst, Daniel Eglen, Stephen J. F1000Res Method Article The traditional scientific paper falls short of effectively communicating computational research. To help improve this situation, we propose a system by which the computational workflows underlying research articles are checked. The CODECHECK system uses open infrastructure and tools and can be integrated into review and publication processes in multiple ways. We describe these integrations along multiple dimensions (importance, who, openness, when). In collaboration with academic publishers and conferences, we demonstrate CODECHECK with 25 reproductions of diverse scientific publications. These CODECHECKs show that asking for reproducible workflows during a collaborative review can effectively improve executability. While CODECHECK has clear limitations, it may represent a building block in Open Science and publishing ecosystems for improving the reproducibility, appreciation, and, potentially, the quality of non-textual research artefacts. The CODECHECK website can be accessed here: https://codecheck.org.uk/. F1000 Research Limited 2021-07-20 /pmc/articles/PMC8311796/ /pubmed/34367614 http://dx.doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.51738.2 Text en Copyright: © 2021 Nüst D and Eglen SJ https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Licence, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Method Article Nüst, Daniel Eglen, Stephen J. CODECHECK: an Open Science initiative for the independent execution of computations underlying research articles during peer review to improve reproducibility |
title | CODECHECK: an Open Science initiative for the independent execution of computations underlying research articles during peer review to improve reproducibility |
title_full | CODECHECK: an Open Science initiative for the independent execution of computations underlying research articles during peer review to improve reproducibility |
title_fullStr | CODECHECK: an Open Science initiative for the independent execution of computations underlying research articles during peer review to improve reproducibility |
title_full_unstemmed | CODECHECK: an Open Science initiative for the independent execution of computations underlying research articles during peer review to improve reproducibility |
title_short | CODECHECK: an Open Science initiative for the independent execution of computations underlying research articles during peer review to improve reproducibility |
title_sort | codecheck: an open science initiative for the independent execution of computations underlying research articles during peer review to improve reproducibility |
topic | Method Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8311796/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34367614 http://dx.doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.51738.2 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT nustdaniel codecheckanopenscienceinitiativefortheindependentexecutionofcomputationsunderlyingresearcharticlesduringpeerreviewtoimprovereproducibility AT eglenstephenj codecheckanopenscienceinitiativefortheindependentexecutionofcomputationsunderlyingresearcharticlesduringpeerreviewtoimprovereproducibility |