New blog post: "Why computational reproducibility matters"
https://blog.khinsen.net/posts/2025/06/20/computational-reproducibility.html
New blog post: "Why computational reproducibility matters"
https://blog.khinsen.net/posts/2025/06/20/computational-reproducibility.html
If you can't identify why you're getting different results on different versions of Debian that means your understanding of your code or the problem is incomplete and you should resolve that before publishing.
I think this should be classified with all the rat studies that haven't corrected for what rats are really capable of.
This guy actually did a study on what it took to keep rats from using external cues to run mazes and it involved freshly sterilized floors for each run to eliminate odor clues, building the maze on a sand table so vibrations didn't cue them in, and so on.
And even worse, it makes it seem like it's something that "regular" researchers can't/shouldn't do as part of their jobs!
Given the current state of computational reproducibility, I've come to find that problem very boring and irrelevant in a non-CS context. Even in the best case scenario of being bit-by-bit reproducible, it doesn't help learning anything new, but somehow that's the issue people are focusing on in many disciplines.
What matters more for Alice and Bob "reproducing our results" or "understand how we are reproducing it" (and why we can't).
In the same idea is understanding why we get different numbers important for Alice/Bob or is it more important for the CS fields?
I want time to learn GUIX ...
This is a small personal instance of Bonfire in the Fediverse.