cd4-histone-paper-code
3d-reorganization-prostate-cancer
cd4-histone-paper-code | 3d-reorganization-prostate-cancer | |
---|---|---|
1 | 1 | |
2 | 0 | |
- | - | |
10.0 | 0.0 | |
about 8 years ago | about 1 year ago | |
R | HTML | |
- | GNU General Public License v3.0 only |
Stars - the number of stars that a project has on GitHub. Growth - month over month growth in stars.
Activity is a relative number indicating how actively a project is being developed. Recent commits have higher weight than older ones.
For example, an activity of 9.0 indicates that a project is amongst the top 10% of the most actively developed projects that we are tracking.
cd4-histone-paper-code
-
Ask HN: Should I publish my research code?
FWIW, this is how I've released the crappy barely-working "academic quality" code for a paper in the past:
https://github.com/DarwinAwardWinner/cd4-histone-paper-code
The main points are that I made only a minimal attempt to organize it, and I made the state of the code clear in the README. I don't recall anyone complaining about the code or even mentioning it during review. (I also don't recall whether I published the code before or after the paper was accepted.)
3d-reorganization-prostate-cancer
-
Ask HN: Should I publish my research code?
You're right, it is substantially more work to clean and organize the code for publishing. Being open about your work does make the attack surface much larger and more likely to be nitpicked, criticized, have an error found, etc.
But it is more honest. Whatever you think about the effort required to do this, there's value in honesty.
Here is an example of my own scientific work:
- paper [0]
- preprint [1]
- GitHub [2]
It certainly wasn't easy to get all of this done. But doing this can also be a guide for others. They get to see exactly what you've done so that they don't waste months on the exact implementation. They can see where maybe you've made some mistakes to avoid them. They can see so much of the implicit knowledge that is left out of your paper and learn from it. Your code isn't going to be perfect, but what paper is, either?
Everyone will be a critic, anyway, so make it easy to pick up criticism of the stuff you feel the least confident in and do better next time. You won't get better if no one sees your code.
[0]: https://cancerres.aacrjournals.org/content/81/23/5833
[1]: https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.01.05.425333v2
[2]: https://github.com/LupienLab/3d-reorganization-prostate-canc...
What are some alternatives?
superconductor - A tool to simulate superconducting circuits, comparable to SPICE.
crux - Software toolkit for molecular phylogenetic inference
3d-reorganization-prostate-canc
pyview - pyview contains all reusable and generic classes and functions that I used in my qubit data acquisition setup during my PhD thesis.