I recently came across a research paper from 2025 that caught my attention. The idea behind it wasn’t particularly new or groundbreaking, but I was interested in exploring it further. However, when I tried to access the code linked in the paper, I found that it was broken.
After some digging, I discovered that the same paper had been rejected from another conference, but the authors had shared their code there. I decided to reach out to the corresponding author to ask about the experimental procedure, hoping to learn from their work and even build upon it.
What followed was a series of frustrating interactions. The first author shared a GitHub repository that had been created just three weeks prior, but the experimental setup was still very vague. When I asked for clarification, the author became unresponsive.
As someone who has worked in this field for a while, I know that sharing code is not only possible but also essential for advancing research. It’s disappointing to see authors being secretive about their methods, especially when they’ve already shared their work publicly.
I’m not looking to call out the authors or the paper specifically, but I do want to highlight the importance of reproducibility in research. If we can’t replicate the results of a study, how can we trust its findings? And if authors are unwilling to share their methods, what does that say about the validity of their work?
I’d love to hear from others who have experienced similar frustrations. Have you ever tried to reproduce a study, only to find that the authors were uncooperative or unclear about their methods? How did you handle the situation?
Let’s work together to promote transparency and reproducibility in research. By sharing our methods and data, we can build upon each other’s work and make real progress in our fields.
