No demonstrated link between sea-level and eruption history at Santorini

Walker, R. J.; Gill, S.P.A.; Greenfield, Catherine; McCaffrey, K. J. W.; Stephens, Tara

doi:10.31223/x5961n

Cited by 2 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Waage et al, 2018); 3) the reproducibility of individual studies (e.g. Walker et al, 2021) and 4) improving the repeatability of specific workflows (e.g. Jun & Cho, 2022).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

How reproducible and reliable is geophysical research? A review of the availability and accessibility of data and software for research published in journals

Ireland¹,

Algarabel²,

Steventon³

et al. 2023

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Geophysical research frequently makes use of agreed methodologies, formally published software, and bespoke code to process and analyse data. The reliability and repeatability of these methods is vital in maintaining the integrity of research findings and thereby avoiding the dissemination of unreliable results. In recent years there has been an increased attention on aspects of reproducibility, which includes data availability, across scientific disciplines. This review considers aspects of reproducibility of geophysical studies relating to their publication in peer reviewed journals. Specifically, it considers: 1) the extent to which reproducibility in geophysics is the focus of published literature; 2) journal policies on the requirements for providing code, software, and data for submission and, 3) the availability of code, software and data associated for existing journal articles. The findings show that: 1) between 1991 and 2021 there were 27 articles with reproducibility in the title and 222 with reliability, with a year on year increases in both over the same period; 2) while 60% of journals have a definition of research data, only 20% of journals have a requirement for a data availability statement, and 3) despite ~86% of randomly sampled journal articles including a data availability statement, only 54% of articles have the original data accessible via data repositories or web servers. It is suggested that despite journals and authors working towards improving the availability of data, frequently these data are not easily accessible, therefore limiting possibility of reproducing studies.

show abstract

“…Waage et al, 2018); 3) the reproducibility of individual studies (e.g. Walker et al, 2021) and 4) improving the repeatability of specific workflows (e.g. Jun & Cho, 2022).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%