Comment on “Most computational hydrology is not reproducible, so is it really science?” by Christopher Hutton et al. Let hydrologists learn the latest computer science by working with Research Software Engineers (RSEs) and not reinvent the waterwheel ourselves

Research output: Contribution to journalComment/Letter to the editorScientific

4 Citations (Scopus)
3 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

The suggestions by Hutton et al. might not be enough to guarantee reproducible computational hydrology. Archiving software code and research data alone will not be enough. We add to the suggestion of Hutton et al. that hydrologists not only document their (computer) work, but that hydrologists use the latest best practices in designing research software, most notably the use of containers and open interfaces. To make sure hydrologists know of these best practices, we urge close collaboration with Research Software Engineers (RSEs).

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)4524-4526
Number of pages3
JournalWater Resources Research
Volume53
Issue number5
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 1 May 2017

Keywords

  • computational hydrology
  • computer science
  • research software

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Comment on “Most computational hydrology is not reproducible, so is it really science?” by Christopher Hutton et al. Let hydrologists learn the latest computer science by working with Research Software Engineers (RSEs) and not reinvent the waterwheel ourselves'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

  • Cite this