RESEARCH NOTE / 001METHODS, INPUTS & INTERPRETATION

REPRODUCIBLE COMPUTE

Keep the question.
Keep the evidence.

ABSTRACT

An experiment does not end at a number. The useful part is the trail: what changed, what stayed fixed, and why the comparison matters.

Open the experiment notebook
EXPERIMENT 001ILLUSTRATIVE DATA

Convergence, observed.

A controlled comparison of two sample estimators.

[01]
Normalized illustrative error ↓
.30.20.1001664128
Reference estimator Adjusted estimatorSample 64 · illustrative error 0.125

Prepared example · your adjustments stay in this page.

MARGIN NOTES

Make the next run
comparable.

A practical workspace model for computational experiments: input manifests, pinned environments, resource assumptions and results you can explain. Make the next run comparable to the last.

  1. An explicit run manifest

    Record code revision, parameters, input references and environment identity. A notebook title is not enough to reconstruct an experiment.

  2. Comparable environments

    Track dependency versions and relevant hardware characteristics. Separate a code change from a runtime change when comparing outcomes.

  3. Results with provenance

    Link each output to the run that produced it. Keep interpretation alongside raw results so another person can review the conclusion.

  4. Resource-aware execution

    State memory, time and storage expectations before launching work. Treat interruption and partial output as normal engineering cases.

From the methods shelf

01

A useful experiment manifest

The minimum record needed to understand a computational run.

02

Compare experiments fairly

Prevent environment and input changes from obscuring the question.

03

Design for interrupted runs

Checkpoints and partial results that are safe to continue.