http://rescience.github.io/
Tl;dr:
Reproducibility is important. Publishing a paper which results can't be used by any reader is more or less useless. However, while everybody talks about reproducibility, but nobody accepts papers about reproduction of the existing research for publication, let alone the fact of publishing non-reproducible research (not enough details, no open dataset, etc.), which is OK sometimes, but usually is not.
Moreover, what people usually mean when they say "reproducibility" (possibility of repeating the exact experiment described in paper and achieving same results) is "replicability" (possibility of conducting similar experiments with similar results).
This journal aims to be an open access and open source platform to publish replication computational research (which is easier to both replicate and verify).
Tl;dr:
Reproducibility is important. Publishing a paper which results can't be used by any reader is more or less useless. However, while everybody talks about reproducibility, but nobody accepts papers about reproduction of the existing research for publication, let alone the fact of publishing non-reproducible research (not enough details, no open dataset, etc.), which is OK sometimes, but usually is not.
Moreover, what people usually mean when they say "reproducibility" (possibility of repeating the exact experiment described in paper and achieving same results) is "replicability" (possibility of conducting similar experiments with similar results).
This journal aims to be an open access and open source platform to publish replication computational research (which is easier to both replicate and verify).
rescience.github.io
ReScience C
Reproducible Science is good.
Replicated Science is better.
Replicated Science is better.
Best WMT'19 unsupervised translation solution: http://www.statmt.org/wmt19/pdf/53/WMT30.pdf