Is it time to up the statistical standard for scientific results?

Re: Is it time to up the statistical standard for scientific... by dllthomas on Wednesday November 13, 2013 @08:21AM (#6724970)

While I think availability of data and code is important, note that it does not accomplish many of the functions of replication of experiments. If two people implement the described algorithm and get the same results, we can be a lot more confident than if two people run the same implementation, because the same implementation is more likely to have the same bugs.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re: Is it time to up the statistical standard for scientific... by qwerta on Wednesday November 13, 2013 @08:29AM (#6725016)

Code has to be reviewed and _VERIFIED_. How can an article pass peer review, if nobody even checked code for basic mistakes?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re: Is it time to up the statistical standard for scientific... by dllthomas on Wednesday November 13, 2013 @10:47AM (#6725918)

Yes, precisely. Publishing code and data is necessary for peer review, not for replication. Both are necessary parts of science.

[ Parent | on HN ]