1 / 10

Rewarding Reproduceable Research

This article explores the responsibility of researchers to contribute accurate and efficient knowledge, the problems with incentives in publishing, and the importance of reproducibility in research. It discusses the impact of cliques, the expanding world of research, and the need for a shift towards more open and reliable research practices. The article also addresses the concerns surrounding irreproducible research and the wasted resources it entails.

gwendolyna
Download Presentation

Rewarding Reproduceable Research

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Rewarding Reproduceable Research Jon Crowcroft, http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~jac22

  2. Responsibility towards public • Research contribute to knowledge of human race • Duty to do so accurately and efficiently • Probably counter productive: • Minimum publishable unit • Maximum citation count • Incentives may be part of problem • Can we improve eco-system?

  3. Why isn’t Darwin our friend? • Fitness Landscape is lumpy • Publish or perish • Gaming PC, Editor, • Other authors • Cliques • World is getting bigger… • Timescales & Entropy • Note: RR != Open Access, but it helps

  4. Make RR sexier? IR RR Slower Messier May not pan out…oops I dropped the petri dish Nobel, Turing etc++ Test of time ++ See crawdad • Quicker • Slicker • No fear of negative result • Who cares? • -ve citations? • see kleinberg

  5. Irreprodeceable Unacceptable? • Waste of tax payers money • Waste of reviewer cycles • What were reviewers thinking? • “Not even wrong”… • How can this even be a thing? “Usability Evaluation Considered Harmful”

  6. Negative results • How come 90% of research “worked”. • When • Only 10% of startups succeed… • Implausible....

  7. The obligatory xkcd 1909

  8. Dare I say? • Exemplar: https://www.usenix.org/system/files/conference/nsdi15/nsdi15-paper-grosvenor_update.pdf • But also: https://pubpeer.com/ • Time to design and run… a measurement experiment….?

  9. Some more examples • Going from research to startup • Openstreetcab.com • Hatdex.org • https://www.turing.ac.uk/category/research/research-interests/

  10. But…Who Am I?

More Related