New gold standard established for open and reproducible research

May 3, 2015

A group of Cambridge computer scientists have set a new gold standard for openness and reproducibility in research by sharing the more than 200GB of data and 20,000 lines of code behind their latest results - an unprecedented degree of openness in a peer-reviewed publication. The researchers hope that this new gold standard will be adopted by other fields, increasing the reliability of research results, especially for work which is publicly funded.

The researchers are presenting their results at a talk today at the 12th USENIX Symposium on Networked Systems Design and Implementation (NSDI) in Oakland, California.

In recent years there's been a great deal of discussion about so-called 'open access' publications - the idea that , particularly those funded by money, should be made publicly available.

Computer science has embraced open access more than many disciplines, with some publishers sub-licensing publications and allowing authors to publish them in open archives. However, as more and more corporations publish their research in academic journals, and as academics find themselves in a 'publish or perish' culture, the reliability of has come into question.

"Open access isn't as open as you think, especially when there are corporate interests involved," said Matthew Grosvenor, a PhD student from the University's Computer Laboratory, and the paper's lead author. "Due to commercial sensitivities, corporations are reluctant to make their code and available when they publish in peer-reviewed journals. But without the code or data sets, the results are irrelevant - we can't know whether an experiment is the same if we try to recreate it."

Beyond , a number of high-profile incidents of errors, fraud or misconduct have called quality standards in research into question. This has thrown the issue of reproducibility - that a result can be reliably repeated given the same conditions - into the spotlight.

"If a result cannot be reliably repeated, then how can we trust it?" said Grosvenor. "If you try to reproduce other people's work from the paper alone, you often end up with different numbers. Unless you have access to everything, it's useless to call a piece of research open source. It's either open source or it's not - you can't open source just a little bit."

With their most recent publication, Grosvenor and his colleagues have gone several steps beyond typical standards - setting a new gold standard for open and reproducible research. All of the experimental figures and tables in the award-winning final version of their paper, which describes a new method of making data centres more efficient, are clickable.

By clicking on any of the figures or tables in the paper, readers are taken to a website where the researchers have produced technically detailed descriptions of the methods for every one of their experiments. These descriptions include the original data sets and tools that were used to produce the figures as well as free and open source access to all of the source code that they wrote and modified.

In the past this might not have been possible, but thanks to cheap cloud storage, the researchers have put nearly 200GB of data and 20,000 lines of code on to the internet and made it freely available to all under a permissive license.

"It now should be possible for anyone with a collection of computers to follow our instructions and produce our exact graphs," said Grosvenor. "We think that this is the way forward for all scientific publications and so we've put our money where our mouth is and done it."

Explore further: University of California adopts open-access policy for research papers

More information: Queues don't matter when you can JUMP them! the 12th USENIX Symposium on Networked Systems Design and Implementation (NSDI), 2015.

Related Stories

Recommended for you

New method analyzes corn kernel characteristics

November 17, 2017

An ear of corn averages about 800 kernels. A traditional field method to estimate the number of kernels on the ear is to manually count the number of rows and multiply by the number of kernels in one length of the ear. With ...

Optically tunable microwave antennas for 5G applications

November 16, 2017

Multiband tunable antennas are a critical part of many communication and radar systems. New research by engineers at the University of Bristol has shown significant advances in antennas by using optically induced plasmas ...

4 comments

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

RobPaulG
1.8 / 5 (5) May 04, 2015
The fecal standard for reproducible research would be "climate science". Where old data is altered, or bogus data is created and then still needs to manipulated to produced desired results.
Manitou
not rated yet May 04, 2015
This is good. It reverses a recent trend where authors hide their methods as much as possible. In social research in particular, even the software used is mentionned less and less (e.g. searches for mention of SPSS, SAS, R, Stata turn up empty more and more).
antialias_physorg
5 / 5 (2) May 04, 2015
Nice move to put everything under open access.

However, they also point out:
"Open access isn't as open as you think, especially when there are corporate interests involved,"

Therein lies the rub. If a research project is fully government funded and not used to create any commercial spin-offs then the decision to go open access is easy.
But today most research is financed with a mix of money from universities, government grants and private corporations.

The latter want to gain usable results for their own products without paying for all of the work - so they are naturally loath to allow open access as that would basically mean they just paid for developments that their competitors can use right away for free. Economically I can understand the dilemma

(And I know no way out of this other than to go full-government funded again and let companies do their own research on their own dime. Unlikely given governemnts' constant cutting of research funds).


mikemoreno100
not rated yet May 05, 2015
ever heard of level playing field? China and Russia take all research free and apply to all military applications. Thanks America and the foolish dreamers who create so that we can pollute and distort . The AI research will always be guided into military devices created to wipe out the West. Drones with Ebola/small pox virus are coming to your nearest water supply.

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more

Click here to reset your password.
Sign in to get notified via email when new comments are made.