The contribution of a reproduction paper is based on analyses of plus in insights into current methods and problems—plus the additional certainty that includes validating past outcomes.

The contribution of a reproduction paper is based on analyses of plus in insights into current methods and problems—plus the additional certainty that includes validating past outcomes.

  1. Relevance: Is it paper highly relevant to COLING?
  2. Readability/clarity: could be the paper well-written and well-structured?
  3. Data/code access: may be the data/code (as appropriate) open to the investigation community or perhaps is here a reason that is compelling why this isn’t feasible?
  4. Analysis: If the paper surely could reproduce the total link between the previous work, does it plainly construct exactly exactly what would have to be filled in to do therefore? It clearly identify what information was missing/the likely causes if it wasn’t able to replicate the results of earlier work, does?
  5. Generalizability: Does the paper exceed replicating the total outcomes in the initial to explore whether or not they may be reproduced an additional environment? Instead, in instances of non-replicability, does the paper talk about the wider implications of this outcome?
  6. Informativeness: To exactly exactly exactly what level does the analysis reported into the paper deepen our comprehension of the methodology utilized or the nagging issue approached? Will the information within the paper assistance professionals with regards to selection of technique/resource? Continue reading “The contribution of a reproduction paper is based on analyses of plus in insights into current methods and problems—plus the additional certainty that includes validating past outcomes.”