[Comp-neuro] Re: Reproducability, Funding, and a note on hippocampus

Ted Carnevale 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
statement

> 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
SimToolDB
   http://senselab.med.yale.edu/SimToolDB/
as a site for posting at least the code used to implement such
algorithms.

--Ted



More information about the Comp-neuro mailing list