titute, University of Utah
> Salt Lake City, UT
ha -- also the land of SCIRun pipes and toys:
http://www.sci.utah.edu/cibc/software.html
if we are to share the links, here is imho also very relevant approach
for reproducibility assurance within research itself:
http://neuralensemble.org/trac/su
researchers/projects at once (for example - university-wide high
performance cluster) if those groups indeed require some custom software
no available natively as a part of OS. But I think it just complicates
reproducibility -- complete chroot/virtual machine sounds more appe
2010-04-30 16:29, Michael Hanke skrev:
Usually we have some version in stable and some people will use it.
[...]
In
Debian we have the universal operating system that incorporates all
software and 'stable' is a snapshot of everything at the time of release
-- and this is not what scientists
Those of you interested in reproducibility might be interested in
VisTrails. These is a start-up commercializing the software but most
of it is free and development is open source, available from
http://www.vistrails.org/index.php/Downloads. I remember that the
software keeps track of the
On Fri, 2010-04-30 at 14:18 +0200, Andreas Tille wrote:
> I can confirm that this is actually the reason why at Sanger Institute
> (even if there are three DDs working) plain Debian (and specifically the
> Debian Med packages) is not used.
FYI, I uploaded a new version of the Med packages on Monda
Teemu Ikonen writes:
> Does anyone here have good ideas on how to ensure reproducibility in
> the long term?
Regression testing, as mentioned, or running some fixed analysis and
statistically comparing the results to past runs.
We worry about reproducibility in my field of particle p
On Fri, Apr 30, 2010 at 03:23:42PM +0200, Andreas Tille wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 30, 2010 at 09:30:16AM -0300, David Bremner wrote:
> > > Yes, that's the problem.
> >
> > For stable releases though, we have the time, and we can (I suspect) get
> > the compute cycles to run heavy regression tests. Woul
On Fri, Apr 30, 2010 at 09:30:16AM -0300, David Bremner wrote:
> > Yes, that's the problem.
>
> For stable releases though, we have the time, and we can (I suspect) get
> the compute cycles to run heavy regression tests. Would that be a
> worthwhile project?
Well, it is not me who raised this pr
On Fri, Apr 30, 2010 at 07:07:21AM -0400, Michael Hanke wrote:
> > This nice abstract inspired me to think about reproducibility of
> > program runs. If one runs e.g. Debian unstable the OS code which can
> > potentially affect the results of calculations can change almost
>
aking
> > verification efforts feasible.
>
> Dear list,
>
> This nice abstract inspired me to think about reproducibility of
> program runs. If one runs e.g. Debian unstable the OS code which can
> potentially affect the results of calculations can change almost
> daily. Reprodu
ons makes it almost impossible to verify that a
> particular software is working as intended. Restricting the
> ``supported'' runtime environment is one approach of making
> verification efforts feasible.
Dear list,
This nice abstract inspired me to think about reproducibility o
11 matches
Mail list logo
