Post #2006219
2026-04-28 13:34 UTC
Interesting remark by @k9ox in the FedWiki Matrix room: "I don't mind wiki being unreliable but I want to know why it isn't."
This looks like a good framing for reproducibility issues in science as well. If something is not reproducible but it is generally understood why, that's OK - not nice, perhaps, but it's possible to work around it. But if you can't reproduce a result that everybody believes to be reproducible, that's a problem.
CC @danielskatz
Replies (1)
-
@danielskatz@fediscience.org 2026-04-28 13:43
@khinsen @k9ox I mostly agree with your framing. I went to a reproducibility workshop about 9 years ago (https://www.mrsec.harvard.edu/2017NSFReliability/cw/report.php) that had a bunch of examples where the lack of reproducibility of results led to new scientific understanding.