The ACM.org website published the work of a team at Carnegie Mellon (#CMU) which was said to include source code. Then the code was omitted from the attached ZIP file, which only contained another copy of the paper. I asked the lead researcher (a prof) for the code and was ignored. Also asked the other researchers (apparently students), who also ignored the request. The code would have made it possible to reproduce the research and verify it. ACM also ignored my request and also neglected to fix the misinfo (the claim on the page that source code is available). Correction: ACM replied and tried to find the missing code but then just gave up.

It seems like this should taint the research in some way. Why don’t they want people reproducing the research? If the idea is that scientific research is “peer reviewed” for integrity, it seems like a façade if reviewers don’t have a voice. Or is there some kind of 3rd party who would call this out?

        • plantteacher@mander.xyzOP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          13 days ago

          They could try to say that but I doubt people would believe it.

          Who throws away their own code particularly when it’s not junky commercial code but code their heart and soul was behind on a non-profit project? I keep my old code around if anything just to be able to search it to re-teach myself coding and design tips I forgot about. This code backs their research which they may need to refer to when a prospective employer asks for detail on how they executed the study.

          • jatone@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            13 days ago

            Thats a you decision. Many people dont actually care about their phd or research studies. And this particular one looks very throw away.