Re: Reproducability, Funding, and a note on hippocampus
carnevalet at sbcglobal.net
Wed Aug 20 16:39:02 CEST 2008
A. David Redish wrote:
> 1. Reproducability.
David's comments about reproducibility (or the lack thereof)
in experimental neuroscience are well taken. However, this
> Computational models . . .
> [are] of the places where reproducability is actually the
> best in neuroscience.
remains mostly only a theoretical possibility because, for a
multitude of reasons, the promise implicit in the first two
clauses of this statement
> You can always send completed code, I can run
> it, and then I can deconstruct it if I want.
is _rarely_ achieved.
> I suggest that we need a method for sharing analytical algorithms as
> well as computational models. It would also be good to find
> quantitative and accepted ways to validate and justify algorithms (and
> to identify their limits).
Good points. As a partial solution to the problem, let me suggest
as a site for posting at least the code used to implement such
More information about the Comp-neuro