Sometimes we forget about what is really important… Have you ever stopped for a moment in the course of everyday life and looked better at the reproductivity of the scientific article? Have you ever wondered - can I do what authors did in this article and get the same results? If you are not in technical industry - probably not… and it’s perfectly fine. Otherwise - it’s about time to start getting interested. Reproducibility, like wine? Or vice versa? When publishing a work, you definitely need to remember about few basic rules: correct documentation, ensuring that files are up-to-date etc. However, not everyone respects these rules and hence - some articles sooner or later lose readability, reproductivity and therefore their value.

Once researchers public a piece of software and publish a paper about it, should they continue to update the package, resolving users’ issues and adding more features or just leave it be? This question might seem trivial, but turns about to be a bit more complex than you may think. We recently read an artice, written by Ngoc Anh Nguyen, Piotr Piątyszek and Marcin Łukaszyk from Warsaw University of Technology, that covers the subject of how active development of an R package affects the reproducibility of the article that introduced it. What is reproducibility and how it was measured? Reproducibility is a highly desirable quality of a science article, that allows a different research team to attain the identical results using the same methods.