The reviewed record of science sign in
Pith

arxiv: 2003.12206 · v4 · pith:OZ55IPEK · submitted 2020-03-27 · cs.LG · stat.ML

Improving Reproducibility in Machine Learning Research (A Report from the NeurIPS 2019 Reproducibility Program)

Reviewed by Pith T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 kernel pith:OZ55IPEKrecord.jsonopen to challenge →

classification cs.LG stat.ML
keywords reproducibilityresearchlearningmachineprogramcodecommunitycomponents
0
0 comments X
read the original abstract

One of the challenges in machine learning research is to ensure that presented and published results are sound and reliable. Reproducibility, that is obtaining similar results as presented in a paper or talk, using the same code and data (when available), is a necessary step to verify the reliability of research findings. Reproducibility is also an important step to promote open and accessible research, thereby allowing the scientific community to quickly integrate new findings and convert ideas to practice. Reproducibility also promotes the use of robust experimental workflows, which potentially reduce unintentional errors. In 2019, the Neural Information Processing Systems (NeurIPS) conference, the premier international conference for research in machine learning, introduced a reproducibility program, designed to improve the standards across the community for how we conduct, communicate, and evaluate machine learning research. The program contained three components: a code submission policy, a community-wide reproducibility challenge, and the inclusion of the Machine Learning Reproducibility checklist as part of the paper submission process. In this paper, we describe each of these components, how it was deployed, as well as what we were able to learn from this initiative.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet.

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Forward citations

Cited by 2 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score.

  1. Positional Failures in Long-Context LLMs: A Blind Spot in Reasoning Benchmarks

    cs.CL 2026-05 conditional novelty 7.0

    Audits reveal no reasoning benchmark controls position/filler/length jointly; CRE shows LLMs drop up to 88pp on middle-position tasks at 64K context, with diagnostic probe supporting positional cause.

  2. Preregistration for Experiments with AI Agents

    cs.CY 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 4.0

    Proposes extending preregistration practices to AI agent experiments and supplies a tailored template to limit researcher degrees of freedom.