Will a research paper be retracted if the code (which was made publicly available) is shown to have a flaw in the logic?What are issues to consider when making your code for an experimental paradigm, which was conceived by someone else, publicly available?Can I request the code behind a research paper from the author?I need some code that was made available by a student 15 years ago, but is no longer online. How can I contact someone in the group to get the code?How Reproducible should Data and Analysis Methodology Be?Making your code publicly available: Does it have to undergo review?
The meaning of "scale" in "because diversions scale so easily wealth becomes concentrated"
Can a Hogwarts student refuse the Sorting Hat's decision?
Write The Shortest Program To Check If A Binary Tree Is Balanced
Which genus do I use for neutral expressions in German?
What does the ISO setting for mechanical 35mm film cameras actually do?
Does a 4 bladed prop have almost twice the thrust of a 2 bladed prop?
Examples of hyperbolic groups
Could an areostationary satellite help locate asteroids?
What was the role of Commodore-West Germany?
How to approach protecting my code as a research assistant? Should I be worried in the first place?
Best way to explain to my boss that I cannot attend a team summit because it is on Rosh Hashana or any other Jewish Holiday
How many years before enough atoms of your body are replaced to survive the sudden disappearance of the original body’s atoms?
The Game of the Century - why didn't Byrne take the rook after he forked Fischer?
Why am I not getting stuck in the loop
If the interviewer says "We have other interviews to conduct and then back to you in few days", is it a bad sign to not get the job?
Why do cheap flights with a layover get more expensive when you split them up into separate flights?
Did Apollo leave poop on the moon?
Do some languages mention the top limit of a range first?
Is the first page of a novel really that important?
Can chords be inferred from melody alone?
In MTG, was there ever a five-color deck that worked well?
Why did the US Airways Flight 1549 passengers stay on the wings?
Did Captain America make out with his niece?
How do I get the =LEFT function in excel, to also take the number zero as the first number?
Will a research paper be retracted if the code (which was made publicly available) is shown to have a flaw in the logic?
What are issues to consider when making your code for an experimental paradigm, which was conceived by someone else, publicly available?Can I request the code behind a research paper from the author?I need some code that was made available by a student 15 years ago, but is no longer online. How can I contact someone in the group to get the code?How Reproducible should Data and Analysis Methodology Be?Making your code publicly available: Does it have to undergo review?
.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty margin-bottom:0;
Say I have written code that performs a physics calculation. After this, I get a paper published based on the results of the code. In the interest of advancing the progress of science, I upload the code used for the paper on, say, GitHub. I also post a link to my code on GitHub on my website. I do this to facilitate discovery and use of the code by those who are interested in my results. Imagine that someone, in the process of reproducing my results (using the aforementioned code), discovers a flaw in the logic of the code. Correction of this logic flaw leads to invalidation of the central idea of the paper.
Will this lead to retraction?
Will there be any positive gain to me as a result of publishing of the code?
physics code open-science software-papers
New contributor
add a comment |
Say I have written code that performs a physics calculation. After this, I get a paper published based on the results of the code. In the interest of advancing the progress of science, I upload the code used for the paper on, say, GitHub. I also post a link to my code on GitHub on my website. I do this to facilitate discovery and use of the code by those who are interested in my results. Imagine that someone, in the process of reproducing my results (using the aforementioned code), discovers a flaw in the logic of the code. Correction of this logic flaw leads to invalidation of the central idea of the paper.
Will this lead to retraction?
Will there be any positive gain to me as a result of publishing of the code?
physics code open-science software-papers
New contributor
add a comment |
Say I have written code that performs a physics calculation. After this, I get a paper published based on the results of the code. In the interest of advancing the progress of science, I upload the code used for the paper on, say, GitHub. I also post a link to my code on GitHub on my website. I do this to facilitate discovery and use of the code by those who are interested in my results. Imagine that someone, in the process of reproducing my results (using the aforementioned code), discovers a flaw in the logic of the code. Correction of this logic flaw leads to invalidation of the central idea of the paper.
Will this lead to retraction?
Will there be any positive gain to me as a result of publishing of the code?
physics code open-science software-papers
New contributor
Say I have written code that performs a physics calculation. After this, I get a paper published based on the results of the code. In the interest of advancing the progress of science, I upload the code used for the paper on, say, GitHub. I also post a link to my code on GitHub on my website. I do this to facilitate discovery and use of the code by those who are interested in my results. Imagine that someone, in the process of reproducing my results (using the aforementioned code), discovers a flaw in the logic of the code. Correction of this logic flaw leads to invalidation of the central idea of the paper.
Will this lead to retraction?
Will there be any positive gain to me as a result of publishing of the code?
physics code open-science software-papers
physics code open-science software-papers
New contributor
New contributor
edited 21 mins ago
jwodder
1273 bronze badges
1273 bronze badges
New contributor
asked 14 hours ago
Tejas ShettyTejas Shetty
516 bronze badges
516 bronze badges
New contributor
New contributor
add a comment |
add a comment |
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
If the main idea in the paper has been invalidated by the correction in the code, you would do well to try to retract the paper yourself. This is just a point of professional ethics. It also protects you in a way from future claims if people don't examine everything thoroughly.
The journal may not be able to actually retract the paper, but might be able to post a note (printed or online) that the paper has a flaw (noted by the author, hopefully).
But others, relying on the original thesis of the paper might be misled in their own work. You really don't want that to happen.
Honesty in science is assumed. Make it so.
You might also be able to publish a better paper, based on the corrected code. Work toward that end.
add a comment |
Will there be any positive gain thanks to the publishing of the code to me?
Publishing the code is necessary to make the calculation reproducible and the results verifiable. If I were the referee of your paper I would likely insist that you publish the code. So the “positive gain” would be that your paper will not be rejected outright. It will also help your reputation and build up other researchers’ impression of you as a serious, careful scientist who understands what it means to do good science.
Besides, what you are asking is essentially “is there a positive gain to behaving honestly”. I’m not going to enter a philosophical discussion about honesty and its benefits here, but just think for a second about what you’re saying. Even in a specific context of academic research, your question can be rephrased as “I am thinking of hiding information about the way I did my research that would be essential for other researchers to verify my results. Is there a positive gain from not hiding this information?” Again, think about what you’re asking.
It’s clear from the question that you are in fact a person who is motivated by a desire to advance science and wants to do the right thing. That’s great, and the conclusion is that it is your duty to disclose the relevant information about your research that would enable other researchers to check your results. If the results later turn out to be invalid, then you and the journal you published in would need to deal with it in an appropriate and responsible way, either by issuing a note pointing out the error, or (which typically would happen only in really extreme, egregious circumstances) by retracting the article. Honestly I don’t think this is something to worry about too much. As long as you’re acting in good faith and doing your best to do good science, you are adding to the sum total of human knowledge and your work has value. That’s what matters, and that’s what you will ultimately be judged on by your peers in the community.
1
I think it is a valid question to ask if honesty or sharing information will be detrimental to a scientific career.
– J. Fabian Meier
10 hours ago
1
@J.FabianMeier agreed. I hope you also think my answer is a valid answer :-)
– Dan Romik
10 hours ago
1
@DanRomik Insisting the code is published might work in some fields, but not in all. In my field (turbulent combustion), the codes are closely-guarded and massive -- our solver is close to 1M lines (500k core code, 500k pre/post/utilities/etc.). It would take months to reproduce results on supercomputers, plus months of training to be able to do all the steps needed to compile/run the code. So while noble, publishing code and checking results is not practical in all fields.
– tpg2114
3 hours ago
1
It also depends if the research was publicly funded or not. Much research is privately-funded or self-funded. Requiring them to give away their technology in order to be able to share their discoveries isn't necessarily for the best.
– A Simple Algorithm
2 hours ago
2
@tpg2114 I understand that the norm in some sub-fields does not make release of code a requirement for publication. That doesn’t mean the norm makes sense. On a philosophical level, withholding code has exactly the same status as withholding experimental data or deliberately obfuscating your description of your research methods to prevent other researchers from building on your work. Yeah, people do those things too and get away with it. It doesn’t make it right.
– Dan Romik
2 hours ago
|
show 2 more comments
@Buffy is certainly right that Science itself gains a lot if people publish their code. Papers without code (the norm in many scientific areas) are hard to reproduce or build upon.
But you ask what you gain from this, or if it might harm your career.
First of all, it is unlikely that somebody finds a major flaw in your program and it is even more unlikely that a journal will retract the paper because somebody else (not you) requested this. Most of the wrong or doubtful results just stay in the literature.
What is much more likely: Somebody will actually use or extend your results, and help you improve them. So he/she will cite you or work with you on a future paper. This is definitely something you want.
3
it is unlikely that somebody finds a major flaw in your program, yet, the OP hypothesises that such a flaw has been found.
– user2768
13 hours ago
1
This was more an answer to Will there be any positive gain thanks to the publishing of the code to me?
– J. Fabian Meier
12 hours ago
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "415"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);
else
createEditor();
);
function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);
);
Tejas Shetty is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2facademia.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f134338%2fwill-a-research-paper-be-retracted-if-the-code-which-was-made-publicly-availabl%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
If the main idea in the paper has been invalidated by the correction in the code, you would do well to try to retract the paper yourself. This is just a point of professional ethics. It also protects you in a way from future claims if people don't examine everything thoroughly.
The journal may not be able to actually retract the paper, but might be able to post a note (printed or online) that the paper has a flaw (noted by the author, hopefully).
But others, relying on the original thesis of the paper might be misled in their own work. You really don't want that to happen.
Honesty in science is assumed. Make it so.
You might also be able to publish a better paper, based on the corrected code. Work toward that end.
add a comment |
If the main idea in the paper has been invalidated by the correction in the code, you would do well to try to retract the paper yourself. This is just a point of professional ethics. It also protects you in a way from future claims if people don't examine everything thoroughly.
The journal may not be able to actually retract the paper, but might be able to post a note (printed or online) that the paper has a flaw (noted by the author, hopefully).
But others, relying on the original thesis of the paper might be misled in their own work. You really don't want that to happen.
Honesty in science is assumed. Make it so.
You might also be able to publish a better paper, based on the corrected code. Work toward that end.
add a comment |
If the main idea in the paper has been invalidated by the correction in the code, you would do well to try to retract the paper yourself. This is just a point of professional ethics. It also protects you in a way from future claims if people don't examine everything thoroughly.
The journal may not be able to actually retract the paper, but might be able to post a note (printed or online) that the paper has a flaw (noted by the author, hopefully).
But others, relying on the original thesis of the paper might be misled in their own work. You really don't want that to happen.
Honesty in science is assumed. Make it so.
You might also be able to publish a better paper, based on the corrected code. Work toward that end.
If the main idea in the paper has been invalidated by the correction in the code, you would do well to try to retract the paper yourself. This is just a point of professional ethics. It also protects you in a way from future claims if people don't examine everything thoroughly.
The journal may not be able to actually retract the paper, but might be able to post a note (printed or online) that the paper has a flaw (noted by the author, hopefully).
But others, relying on the original thesis of the paper might be misled in their own work. You really don't want that to happen.
Honesty in science is assumed. Make it so.
You might also be able to publish a better paper, based on the corrected code. Work toward that end.
answered 13 hours ago
BuffyBuffy
76.6k20 gold badges231 silver badges343 bronze badges
76.6k20 gold badges231 silver badges343 bronze badges
add a comment |
add a comment |
Will there be any positive gain thanks to the publishing of the code to me?
Publishing the code is necessary to make the calculation reproducible and the results verifiable. If I were the referee of your paper I would likely insist that you publish the code. So the “positive gain” would be that your paper will not be rejected outright. It will also help your reputation and build up other researchers’ impression of you as a serious, careful scientist who understands what it means to do good science.
Besides, what you are asking is essentially “is there a positive gain to behaving honestly”. I’m not going to enter a philosophical discussion about honesty and its benefits here, but just think for a second about what you’re saying. Even in a specific context of academic research, your question can be rephrased as “I am thinking of hiding information about the way I did my research that would be essential for other researchers to verify my results. Is there a positive gain from not hiding this information?” Again, think about what you’re asking.
It’s clear from the question that you are in fact a person who is motivated by a desire to advance science and wants to do the right thing. That’s great, and the conclusion is that it is your duty to disclose the relevant information about your research that would enable other researchers to check your results. If the results later turn out to be invalid, then you and the journal you published in would need to deal with it in an appropriate and responsible way, either by issuing a note pointing out the error, or (which typically would happen only in really extreme, egregious circumstances) by retracting the article. Honestly I don’t think this is something to worry about too much. As long as you’re acting in good faith and doing your best to do good science, you are adding to the sum total of human knowledge and your work has value. That’s what matters, and that’s what you will ultimately be judged on by your peers in the community.
1
I think it is a valid question to ask if honesty or sharing information will be detrimental to a scientific career.
– J. Fabian Meier
10 hours ago
1
@J.FabianMeier agreed. I hope you also think my answer is a valid answer :-)
– Dan Romik
10 hours ago
1
@DanRomik Insisting the code is published might work in some fields, but not in all. In my field (turbulent combustion), the codes are closely-guarded and massive -- our solver is close to 1M lines (500k core code, 500k pre/post/utilities/etc.). It would take months to reproduce results on supercomputers, plus months of training to be able to do all the steps needed to compile/run the code. So while noble, publishing code and checking results is not practical in all fields.
– tpg2114
3 hours ago
1
It also depends if the research was publicly funded or not. Much research is privately-funded or self-funded. Requiring them to give away their technology in order to be able to share their discoveries isn't necessarily for the best.
– A Simple Algorithm
2 hours ago
2
@tpg2114 I understand that the norm in some sub-fields does not make release of code a requirement for publication. That doesn’t mean the norm makes sense. On a philosophical level, withholding code has exactly the same status as withholding experimental data or deliberately obfuscating your description of your research methods to prevent other researchers from building on your work. Yeah, people do those things too and get away with it. It doesn’t make it right.
– Dan Romik
2 hours ago
|
show 2 more comments
Will there be any positive gain thanks to the publishing of the code to me?
Publishing the code is necessary to make the calculation reproducible and the results verifiable. If I were the referee of your paper I would likely insist that you publish the code. So the “positive gain” would be that your paper will not be rejected outright. It will also help your reputation and build up other researchers’ impression of you as a serious, careful scientist who understands what it means to do good science.
Besides, what you are asking is essentially “is there a positive gain to behaving honestly”. I’m not going to enter a philosophical discussion about honesty and its benefits here, but just think for a second about what you’re saying. Even in a specific context of academic research, your question can be rephrased as “I am thinking of hiding information about the way I did my research that would be essential for other researchers to verify my results. Is there a positive gain from not hiding this information?” Again, think about what you’re asking.
It’s clear from the question that you are in fact a person who is motivated by a desire to advance science and wants to do the right thing. That’s great, and the conclusion is that it is your duty to disclose the relevant information about your research that would enable other researchers to check your results. If the results later turn out to be invalid, then you and the journal you published in would need to deal with it in an appropriate and responsible way, either by issuing a note pointing out the error, or (which typically would happen only in really extreme, egregious circumstances) by retracting the article. Honestly I don’t think this is something to worry about too much. As long as you’re acting in good faith and doing your best to do good science, you are adding to the sum total of human knowledge and your work has value. That’s what matters, and that’s what you will ultimately be judged on by your peers in the community.
1
I think it is a valid question to ask if honesty or sharing information will be detrimental to a scientific career.
– J. Fabian Meier
10 hours ago
1
@J.FabianMeier agreed. I hope you also think my answer is a valid answer :-)
– Dan Romik
10 hours ago
1
@DanRomik Insisting the code is published might work in some fields, but not in all. In my field (turbulent combustion), the codes are closely-guarded and massive -- our solver is close to 1M lines (500k core code, 500k pre/post/utilities/etc.). It would take months to reproduce results on supercomputers, plus months of training to be able to do all the steps needed to compile/run the code. So while noble, publishing code and checking results is not practical in all fields.
– tpg2114
3 hours ago
1
It also depends if the research was publicly funded or not. Much research is privately-funded or self-funded. Requiring them to give away their technology in order to be able to share their discoveries isn't necessarily for the best.
– A Simple Algorithm
2 hours ago
2
@tpg2114 I understand that the norm in some sub-fields does not make release of code a requirement for publication. That doesn’t mean the norm makes sense. On a philosophical level, withholding code has exactly the same status as withholding experimental data or deliberately obfuscating your description of your research methods to prevent other researchers from building on your work. Yeah, people do those things too and get away with it. It doesn’t make it right.
– Dan Romik
2 hours ago
|
show 2 more comments
Will there be any positive gain thanks to the publishing of the code to me?
Publishing the code is necessary to make the calculation reproducible and the results verifiable. If I were the referee of your paper I would likely insist that you publish the code. So the “positive gain” would be that your paper will not be rejected outright. It will also help your reputation and build up other researchers’ impression of you as a serious, careful scientist who understands what it means to do good science.
Besides, what you are asking is essentially “is there a positive gain to behaving honestly”. I’m not going to enter a philosophical discussion about honesty and its benefits here, but just think for a second about what you’re saying. Even in a specific context of academic research, your question can be rephrased as “I am thinking of hiding information about the way I did my research that would be essential for other researchers to verify my results. Is there a positive gain from not hiding this information?” Again, think about what you’re asking.
It’s clear from the question that you are in fact a person who is motivated by a desire to advance science and wants to do the right thing. That’s great, and the conclusion is that it is your duty to disclose the relevant information about your research that would enable other researchers to check your results. If the results later turn out to be invalid, then you and the journal you published in would need to deal with it in an appropriate and responsible way, either by issuing a note pointing out the error, or (which typically would happen only in really extreme, egregious circumstances) by retracting the article. Honestly I don’t think this is something to worry about too much. As long as you’re acting in good faith and doing your best to do good science, you are adding to the sum total of human knowledge and your work has value. That’s what matters, and that’s what you will ultimately be judged on by your peers in the community.
Will there be any positive gain thanks to the publishing of the code to me?
Publishing the code is necessary to make the calculation reproducible and the results verifiable. If I were the referee of your paper I would likely insist that you publish the code. So the “positive gain” would be that your paper will not be rejected outright. It will also help your reputation and build up other researchers’ impression of you as a serious, careful scientist who understands what it means to do good science.
Besides, what you are asking is essentially “is there a positive gain to behaving honestly”. I’m not going to enter a philosophical discussion about honesty and its benefits here, but just think for a second about what you’re saying. Even in a specific context of academic research, your question can be rephrased as “I am thinking of hiding information about the way I did my research that would be essential for other researchers to verify my results. Is there a positive gain from not hiding this information?” Again, think about what you’re asking.
It’s clear from the question that you are in fact a person who is motivated by a desire to advance science and wants to do the right thing. That’s great, and the conclusion is that it is your duty to disclose the relevant information about your research that would enable other researchers to check your results. If the results later turn out to be invalid, then you and the journal you published in would need to deal with it in an appropriate and responsible way, either by issuing a note pointing out the error, or (which typically would happen only in really extreme, egregious circumstances) by retracting the article. Honestly I don’t think this is something to worry about too much. As long as you’re acting in good faith and doing your best to do good science, you are adding to the sum total of human knowledge and your work has value. That’s what matters, and that’s what you will ultimately be judged on by your peers in the community.
edited 11 hours ago
answered 12 hours ago
Dan RomikDan Romik
90.7k23 gold badges197 silver badges302 bronze badges
90.7k23 gold badges197 silver badges302 bronze badges
1
I think it is a valid question to ask if honesty or sharing information will be detrimental to a scientific career.
– J. Fabian Meier
10 hours ago
1
@J.FabianMeier agreed. I hope you also think my answer is a valid answer :-)
– Dan Romik
10 hours ago
1
@DanRomik Insisting the code is published might work in some fields, but not in all. In my field (turbulent combustion), the codes are closely-guarded and massive -- our solver is close to 1M lines (500k core code, 500k pre/post/utilities/etc.). It would take months to reproduce results on supercomputers, plus months of training to be able to do all the steps needed to compile/run the code. So while noble, publishing code and checking results is not practical in all fields.
– tpg2114
3 hours ago
1
It also depends if the research was publicly funded or not. Much research is privately-funded or self-funded. Requiring them to give away their technology in order to be able to share their discoveries isn't necessarily for the best.
– A Simple Algorithm
2 hours ago
2
@tpg2114 I understand that the norm in some sub-fields does not make release of code a requirement for publication. That doesn’t mean the norm makes sense. On a philosophical level, withholding code has exactly the same status as withholding experimental data or deliberately obfuscating your description of your research methods to prevent other researchers from building on your work. Yeah, people do those things too and get away with it. It doesn’t make it right.
– Dan Romik
2 hours ago
|
show 2 more comments
1
I think it is a valid question to ask if honesty or sharing information will be detrimental to a scientific career.
– J. Fabian Meier
10 hours ago
1
@J.FabianMeier agreed. I hope you also think my answer is a valid answer :-)
– Dan Romik
10 hours ago
1
@DanRomik Insisting the code is published might work in some fields, but not in all. In my field (turbulent combustion), the codes are closely-guarded and massive -- our solver is close to 1M lines (500k core code, 500k pre/post/utilities/etc.). It would take months to reproduce results on supercomputers, plus months of training to be able to do all the steps needed to compile/run the code. So while noble, publishing code and checking results is not practical in all fields.
– tpg2114
3 hours ago
1
It also depends if the research was publicly funded or not. Much research is privately-funded or self-funded. Requiring them to give away their technology in order to be able to share their discoveries isn't necessarily for the best.
– A Simple Algorithm
2 hours ago
2
@tpg2114 I understand that the norm in some sub-fields does not make release of code a requirement for publication. That doesn’t mean the norm makes sense. On a philosophical level, withholding code has exactly the same status as withholding experimental data or deliberately obfuscating your description of your research methods to prevent other researchers from building on your work. Yeah, people do those things too and get away with it. It doesn’t make it right.
– Dan Romik
2 hours ago
1
1
I think it is a valid question to ask if honesty or sharing information will be detrimental to a scientific career.
– J. Fabian Meier
10 hours ago
I think it is a valid question to ask if honesty or sharing information will be detrimental to a scientific career.
– J. Fabian Meier
10 hours ago
1
1
@J.FabianMeier agreed. I hope you also think my answer is a valid answer :-)
– Dan Romik
10 hours ago
@J.FabianMeier agreed. I hope you also think my answer is a valid answer :-)
– Dan Romik
10 hours ago
1
1
@DanRomik Insisting the code is published might work in some fields, but not in all. In my field (turbulent combustion), the codes are closely-guarded and massive -- our solver is close to 1M lines (500k core code, 500k pre/post/utilities/etc.). It would take months to reproduce results on supercomputers, plus months of training to be able to do all the steps needed to compile/run the code. So while noble, publishing code and checking results is not practical in all fields.
– tpg2114
3 hours ago
@DanRomik Insisting the code is published might work in some fields, but not in all. In my field (turbulent combustion), the codes are closely-guarded and massive -- our solver is close to 1M lines (500k core code, 500k pre/post/utilities/etc.). It would take months to reproduce results on supercomputers, plus months of training to be able to do all the steps needed to compile/run the code. So while noble, publishing code and checking results is not practical in all fields.
– tpg2114
3 hours ago
1
1
It also depends if the research was publicly funded or not. Much research is privately-funded or self-funded. Requiring them to give away their technology in order to be able to share their discoveries isn't necessarily for the best.
– A Simple Algorithm
2 hours ago
It also depends if the research was publicly funded or not. Much research is privately-funded or self-funded. Requiring them to give away their technology in order to be able to share their discoveries isn't necessarily for the best.
– A Simple Algorithm
2 hours ago
2
2
@tpg2114 I understand that the norm in some sub-fields does not make release of code a requirement for publication. That doesn’t mean the norm makes sense. On a philosophical level, withholding code has exactly the same status as withholding experimental data or deliberately obfuscating your description of your research methods to prevent other researchers from building on your work. Yeah, people do those things too and get away with it. It doesn’t make it right.
– Dan Romik
2 hours ago
@tpg2114 I understand that the norm in some sub-fields does not make release of code a requirement for publication. That doesn’t mean the norm makes sense. On a philosophical level, withholding code has exactly the same status as withholding experimental data or deliberately obfuscating your description of your research methods to prevent other researchers from building on your work. Yeah, people do those things too and get away with it. It doesn’t make it right.
– Dan Romik
2 hours ago
|
show 2 more comments
@Buffy is certainly right that Science itself gains a lot if people publish their code. Papers without code (the norm in many scientific areas) are hard to reproduce or build upon.
But you ask what you gain from this, or if it might harm your career.
First of all, it is unlikely that somebody finds a major flaw in your program and it is even more unlikely that a journal will retract the paper because somebody else (not you) requested this. Most of the wrong or doubtful results just stay in the literature.
What is much more likely: Somebody will actually use or extend your results, and help you improve them. So he/she will cite you or work with you on a future paper. This is definitely something you want.
3
it is unlikely that somebody finds a major flaw in your program, yet, the OP hypothesises that such a flaw has been found.
– user2768
13 hours ago
1
This was more an answer to Will there be any positive gain thanks to the publishing of the code to me?
– J. Fabian Meier
12 hours ago
add a comment |
@Buffy is certainly right that Science itself gains a lot if people publish their code. Papers without code (the norm in many scientific areas) are hard to reproduce or build upon.
But you ask what you gain from this, or if it might harm your career.
First of all, it is unlikely that somebody finds a major flaw in your program and it is even more unlikely that a journal will retract the paper because somebody else (not you) requested this. Most of the wrong or doubtful results just stay in the literature.
What is much more likely: Somebody will actually use or extend your results, and help you improve them. So he/she will cite you or work with you on a future paper. This is definitely something you want.
3
it is unlikely that somebody finds a major flaw in your program, yet, the OP hypothesises that such a flaw has been found.
– user2768
13 hours ago
1
This was more an answer to Will there be any positive gain thanks to the publishing of the code to me?
– J. Fabian Meier
12 hours ago
add a comment |
@Buffy is certainly right that Science itself gains a lot if people publish their code. Papers without code (the norm in many scientific areas) are hard to reproduce or build upon.
But you ask what you gain from this, or if it might harm your career.
First of all, it is unlikely that somebody finds a major flaw in your program and it is even more unlikely that a journal will retract the paper because somebody else (not you) requested this. Most of the wrong or doubtful results just stay in the literature.
What is much more likely: Somebody will actually use or extend your results, and help you improve them. So he/she will cite you or work with you on a future paper. This is definitely something you want.
@Buffy is certainly right that Science itself gains a lot if people publish their code. Papers without code (the norm in many scientific areas) are hard to reproduce or build upon.
But you ask what you gain from this, or if it might harm your career.
First of all, it is unlikely that somebody finds a major flaw in your program and it is even more unlikely that a journal will retract the paper because somebody else (not you) requested this. Most of the wrong or doubtful results just stay in the literature.
What is much more likely: Somebody will actually use or extend your results, and help you improve them. So he/she will cite you or work with you on a future paper. This is definitely something you want.
answered 13 hours ago
J. Fabian MeierJ. Fabian Meier
8,4674 gold badges22 silver badges43 bronze badges
8,4674 gold badges22 silver badges43 bronze badges
3
it is unlikely that somebody finds a major flaw in your program, yet, the OP hypothesises that such a flaw has been found.
– user2768
13 hours ago
1
This was more an answer to Will there be any positive gain thanks to the publishing of the code to me?
– J. Fabian Meier
12 hours ago
add a comment |
3
it is unlikely that somebody finds a major flaw in your program, yet, the OP hypothesises that such a flaw has been found.
– user2768
13 hours ago
1
This was more an answer to Will there be any positive gain thanks to the publishing of the code to me?
– J. Fabian Meier
12 hours ago
3
3
it is unlikely that somebody finds a major flaw in your program, yet, the OP hypothesises that such a flaw has been found.
– user2768
13 hours ago
it is unlikely that somebody finds a major flaw in your program, yet, the OP hypothesises that such a flaw has been found.
– user2768
13 hours ago
1
1
This was more an answer to Will there be any positive gain thanks to the publishing of the code to me?
– J. Fabian Meier
12 hours ago
This was more an answer to Will there be any positive gain thanks to the publishing of the code to me?
– J. Fabian Meier
12 hours ago
add a comment |
Tejas Shetty is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Tejas Shetty is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Tejas Shetty is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Tejas Shetty is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Thanks for contributing an answer to Academia Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2facademia.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f134338%2fwill-a-research-paper-be-retracted-if-the-code-which-was-made-publicly-availabl%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown