We currently conflate two ideas that I'll call experimental reproducibility (e. repro) and scientific reproducibility (s. repro).
-
-
"However useful it is to be able to re-run code from the past, it is often secondary to doing good science because checking that the spec is generally correct — i.e., the theory is actually computationally captured — is more important to science."
-
"Implementation-only details, for example, might need to be upgraded to theory-level if they turn out to be imperative to modelling a certain effect."
-
"And vice versa, theory-level assumptions could be relaxed if it is found that other important aspects of the theory are nonetheless captured with a variety of implementations."
-
Interestingly analogous to one of the principles of Model-Driven (IT) Architecture: "Raise the level of abstraction", back at the turn of the century. Intended to make designs usable across implementations and easier to understand. http://www.methodsandtools.com/archive/archive.php?id=5 …
-
(Probably too detailed to read it all now but I was amused by the idea that there's a level of abstraction where the ideas converge
) -
I'll check this out! Thanks!
-
LMK if you are interested in it, I could probably save some time for you by finding something less cluttered with then-current technology. Unfortunately I no longer have access to my teaching material.
-
Is it really that confusing? Hahah
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.