Re: [Miase-discuss] MIASE paper - reproducibility

[Nicolas Le n. <le...@eb...>]

Andrew Miller wrote:

> If models are particularly sensitive to details like the exact rounding 
> of floating point numbers, minor algorithmic details, and so on, and the 
> author can't explain why we should believe one set of results but not 
> the other, then that means that the results of the model should be 
> considered unreliable.

If the models is KNOWN to be sensitive, then this has to be described. But 
that cannot be part of any simulation description. Asking too much spurious 
information will result in noone following MIASE guidelines. There are 
precedent.

> However, one minimum information item we could add to address this, 
> while remaining on scope would be:
>    "F. Where the author is aware that the model will produce different 
> results in a different simulation environment or, on a different 
> computational platform, an explanation of why the model should be run on 
> the specified platform in order to properly achieve the purpose of the 
> modeling."

That sounds perfect.

-- 
Nicolas LE NOVERE, Computational Neurobiology, EMBL-EBI, Wellcome-Trust
Genome Campus, Hinxton CB101SD UK, Mob:+447833147074, Tel:+441223494521
Fax:468,Skype:n.lenovere,AIM:nlenovere,MSN:nle...@ho...(NOT email)
http://www.ebi.ac.uk/~lenov/, http://www.ebi.ac.uk/compneur/