Paper detail

[not Rp] Reproducibility of 'Poincare dodecahedral space parameter estimates'

Is a scientific research paper based on (i) public, online observational data files and (ii) providing free-licensed software for reproducing its results easy to reproduce by the same author a decade later? This paper attempts to reproduce a cosmic topology observational paper published in 2008 and satisfying both criteria (i) and (ii). The reproduction steps are defined formally in a free-licensed git repository package "0807.4260" and qualitatively in the current paper. It was found that the effort in upgrading the Fortran 77 code at the heart of the software, interfaced with a C front end, and originally compiled with g77, in the content of the contemporary gfortran compiler, risked being too great to be justified on any short time scale. In this sense, the results of RBG08 are not as reproducible as they appeared to be, despite both (i) data availability and (ii) free-licensing and public availability of the software. The software and a script to reproduce the steps of this incomplete reproduction are combined in a new git repository named 0807.4260, following the ArXiv identity code (arXiv:0807.4260) of RBG08.

preprint2020arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.