Sean Mackinnon

@melissaekline@mefi.social @briannosek@nerdculture.de One of the criteria Brian was looking for in a term was "doesn't assume intentions" and another about "auditor doesn't have any power over others" I think that can be possible with a simple computational reproducibility check, but if you are auditing data for fraud it is by definition, assuming intentionality. If fraud is found, typically it has professional consequences. So, I see them as distinct on those criteria. Both can still be valuable scholarly work though.

@briannosek@nerdculture.de The work of checking if the results in the paper match the dataset/syntax vs. investigating fraud are distinct and a single definition probably shouldn't encompass both. The former could just be "computational reproducibility reviewer" the latter is more like "independent data auditor" I don't think checking for fraud can have a term that meets your criteria without being euphemistic, and thus losing meaning. This article comes to mind in that regard: https://daily.jstor.org/the-ethical-life-of-euphemisms/