Abstract

In this panel discussion, we bring experts with various experiences to discuss community engagement for reproducing research. Our panelists have background in physics, macroecology, neuroscience, and software development, all having dealt with solutions for reproducibility in different setups. Bringing forth the panelists’ knowledge about reproducibility in hackathons, research, publication, and peer review, this panel shall expose different ways that the academic community has to verify the reproducibility of studies, no matter whether they are or are not reproducible. As different approaches may involve people in different points in their careers, we hope we can see the pros and cons of each one within their unique context. We shall also discuss the challenges for the different approaches, and exchange ideas on the path forward to have more people embracing replication and reproducibility practices for a sound development of science.

The panelists for this discussion represent a diversity of disciplines and identities to enrich the experiences shared during this event. The panelists are: Anna Krystalli is an organizer of reproducibility hackathons ReproHack that engage various people who try to reproduce published software; Stephen Eglen is a co-creator of CODECHECK, a project that checks codes during peer review by voluntary checkers; Sergey Frolov is an experimental physicist who scrutinizes published results, and whose activities recently led to the retraction of a Nature paper; Ethienne Roesch is editor of the replication-specialized journal ReScience C and editor-in-chief of ReScience X. This panel will be moderated by Cassio Amorim, creator of the website SciGen.Report.