[yt-dev] "Ten Simple Rules for Reproducible Research"

[Douglas Harvey Rudd]

Very interesting, thanks for the link. I think the notion of computational cost should be included
here, particularly with 7.  A numerical simulation analysis is, fundamentally, something that takes
a random seed and code revision number and produces a plot.  You can store intermediate data
products, but each additional step introduces the possibility of error, version skew, etc, and incurs
the costs of data storage, archival, and migration.  Perhaps a high-level caching layer would be 
useful in an analysis tool that also acted as workflow manager...

Only those stages  
Douglas Rudd
Scientific Computing Consultant
Research Computing Center
drudd at uchicago.edu

On Oct 25, 2013, at 8:54 AM, Matthew Turk <matthewturk at gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi all,
> 
> Titus Brown just posted this to the SWCarpentry discussion list:
> 
> http://www.ploscompbiol.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1003285
> 
> I thought people here may be interested.  And, it occurs to me that in
> yt, these rules are things we have attempted to support, but without
> codifying them -- and, we could do a better job of supporting them.
> In particular, I think rules 5 and 7 are things we could do a better
> job of supporting.
> 
> As an example:
> 
> * FRBs are difficult to store
> * Underlying slices/projections/etc are difficult to store (the raw
> data is not, but the intermediate products are)
> * Profiles are not easily saved
> 
> I think over time as we split the viz layer further from the data, and
> make the data accessible more easily through the viz, these will be
> improved.  But, it's something to think about.  And, the article is a
> good read, too!
> 
> -Matt
> _______________________________________________
> yt-dev mailing list
> yt-dev at lists.spacepope.org
> http://lists.spacepope.org/listinfo.cgi/yt-dev-spacepope.org