Implementing code review in the scientific workflow: Insights from ecology and evolutionary biology

Author:

Ivimey-Cook Edward R.1ORCID,Pick Joel L.2ORCID,Bairos-Novak Kevin R.3ORCID,Culina Antica45ORCID,Gould Elliot6ORCID,Grainger Matthew7ORCID,Marshall Benjamin M.8ORCID,Moreau David9ORCID,Paquet Matthieu10ORCID,Royauté Raphaël11ORCID,Sánchez-Tójar Alfredo12ORCID,Silva Inês13ORCID,Windecker Saras M.6ORCID

Affiliation:

1. School of Biodiversity, One Health and Veterinary Medicine University of Glasgow Glasgow UK

2. Institute of Ecology and Evolution University of Edinburgh Edinburgh UK

3. Australian Research Council Centre of Excellence for Coral Reef Studies & College of Science and Engineering James Cook University Townsville Queensland Australia

4. Netherlands Institute of Ecology, NIOO-KNAW Wageningen the Netherlands

5. Rudjer Boskovic Institute Zagreb Croatia

6. School of Ecosystem and Forest Sciences University of Melbourne Melbourne Victoria Australia

7. Norwegian Institute for Nature Research Trondheim Norway

8. Biological and Environmental Sciences, Faculty of Natural Sciences University of Stirling Stirling UK

9. School of Psychology, Centre for Brain Research University of Auckland Auckland New Zealand

10. Institute of Mathematics of Bordeaux University of Bordeaux, CNRS, Bordeaux INP Talence France

11. Université ParisSaclay, INRAE, AgroParisTech UMR EcoSys Palaiseau France

12. Department of Evolutionary Biology Bielefeld University Bielefeld Germany

13. Center for Advanced Systems Understanding (CASUS), Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden-Rossendorf e.V. (HZDR) Görlitz Germany

Abstract

Abstract Code review increases reliability and improves reproducibility of research. As such, code review is an inevitable step in software development and is common in fields such as computer science. However, despite its importance, code review is noticeably lacking in ecology and evolutionary biology. This is problematic as it facilitates the propagation of coding errors and a reduction in reproducibility and reliability of published results. To address this, we provide a detailed commentary on how to effectively review code, how to set up your project to enable this form of review and detail its possible implementation at several stages throughout the research process. This guide serves as a primer for code review, and adoption of the principles and advice here will go a long way in promoting more open, reliable, and transparent ecology and evolutionary biology. Abstract Code review is the process of either informally (as part of a group, as colleagues) or formally (as part of the peer review process) checking and evaluating each other's code and is a critical method of reducing errors and increasing research reproducibility and reliability. In this paper, we provide a detailed commentary on how to effectively review code (including introducing the four Rs), how to set up your project to enable this form of review and detail its possibleimplementation at several stages throughout the research process.

Funder

Center of Advanced Systems Understanding

Publisher

Oxford University Press (OUP)

Subject

Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3