Reproducible Research and GIScience: An Evaluation Using GIScience Conference Papers
Reproducible Research and GIScience: An Evaluation Using GIScience Conference Papers
复制标题
可重复研究和 GIS 科学：使用 GIS 科学会议论文进行评估
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
2020
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
M. Konkol
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
F. Ostermann;Daniel Nüst;C. Granell;B. Hofer;M. Konkol
GIScience会议的作者和研究人员面临着与使用计算机分析数据的其他学科的作者和研究人员相同的计算再现性挑战。在这里，为了评估GIScience研究的可重复性，我们应用了一个规则来评估2012-2018年GIScience系列会议上发表的75篇会议论文的可重复性。由于标题和过程以前被应用到AGILE会议系列的出版物，本文本身是一个尝试，以复制该分析，但超越了以前的工作，通过评估和讨论提出的措施，以提高再现性的特定背景下的GIScience会议系列。GIScience论文评估的结果与以前的研究结果一致：虽然工作流程的描述以及数据和软件的包含足以解释所提出的工作，但在大多数已发表的论文中，它们不允许第三方通过合理的努力复制结果和发现。我们总结和调整以前的建议，以改善这种情况，并建议GIScience社区开始广泛讨论其研究的可重用性，质量和开放性。此外，我们批判性地反思评估论文再现性的过程，并为改善未来的评估提供建议。本文的代码和数据发布在https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4032875上。
GIScience conference authors and researchers face the same computational reproducibility challenges as authors and researchers from other disciplines who use computers to analyse data. Here, to assess the reproducibility of GIScience research, we apply a rubric for assessing the reproducibility of 75 conference papers published at the GIScience conference series in the years 2012-2018. Since the rubric and process were previously applied to the publications of the AGILE conference series, this paper itself is an attempt to replicate that analysis, however going beyond the previous work by evaluating and discussing proposed measures to improve reproducibility in the specific context of the GIScience conference series. The results of the GIScience paper assessment are in line with previous findings: although descriptions of workflows and the inclusion of the data and software suffice to explain the presented work, in most published papers they do not allow a third party to reproduce the results and findings with a reasonable effort. We summarise and adapt previous recommendations for improving this situation and propose the GIScience community to start a broad discussion on the reusability, quality, and openness of its research. Further, we critically reflect on the process of assessing paper reproducibility, and provide suggestions for improving future assessments. The code and data for this article are published at https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4032875 .
影响因子：
9.8
作者：
Stagge, James H.;Rosenberg, David E.;James, Ryan
通讯作者：
James, Ryan