Peter Dalgaard <p.dalgaard <at> biostat.ku.dk> writes: > Why do so many people have such trouble with the word "reproducible"? We > can't reproduce that without access to weblog_by_date!
In a strict sense, the example is "reproducible" as opposite to "spurious". Reproducible research means that you can get the same results whe you buy an ultracentrifuge, high-grade chemicals, a safety lab, and a technician with a golden hand .:) We should probably better use "self-running" instead, or whatever a native speaker would suggest as an alternative. Even in German I do not know of a better word; it should be "that can be pasted into rterm and give the same result". Dieter ______________________________________________ R-help@r-project.org mailing list https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help PLEASE do read the posting guide http://www.R-project.org/posting-guide.html and provide commented, minimal, self-contained, reproducible code.
