Papers › Computational Reproducibility of R Code Supplements on OSF
Computational Reproducibility of R Code Supplements on OSF
Lorraine Saju, Tobias Holtdirk, Meetkumar Pravinbhai Mangroliya, Arnim Bleier
The archive published only this paper's code-link row. Authors, date and abstract are from arXiv's metadata (CC0), read from the Kaggle arXiv metadata snapshot of 2026-09-12 where its title matched the archive's; the title is the archive's.
Computational reproducibility is fundamental to scientific research, yet many published code supplements lack the necessary documentation to recreate their computational environments. While researchers increasingly share code alongside publications, the actual reproducibility of these materials remains poorly understood. In this work, we assess the computational reproducibility of 296 R projects using the StatCodeSearch dataset. Of these, only 264 were still retrievable, and 98.8% lacked formal dependency descriptions required for successful execution. To address this, we developed an automated pipeline that reconstructs computational environments directly from project source code. Applying this pipeline, we executed the R scripts within custom Docker containers and found that 25.87% completed successfully without error. We conducted a detailed analysis of execution failures, identifying reproducibility barriers such as undeclared dependencies, invalid file paths, and system-level issues. Our findings show that automated dependency inference and containerisation can support scalable verification of computational reproducibility and help identify practical obstacles to code reuse and transparency in scientific research.
Code
Repository list and official/mentioned flags are the archive's, frozen 2025-07-28. Reachability, where shown, is from one Syntology probe window (2026-09-16 to 2026-09-18); repositories not probed show nothing. GitHub stars are not tracked.
Code Syntology ran Syntology
Not run by Syntology. Nothing on this page verifies that the listed code works.
Results from the paper archive 2025-07-28
No leaderboard rows for this paper in the archive.
Report a problem or propose a change · a person checks every report against the paper or source before anything changes; decisions are listed on /corrections