>paper published without an electronic supplement containing a reproducibility guideHow are 99.999% of papers still like this in 2026?
>>17013178Because science is shit and has always been shit
>>17013178The reproduction guide is called "methodology" and it's usually at the start of the paper.
>>17013178I blame the pajeets and Modi.
>>17013253"Methodology" is just a pretentious way of saying "Method"
>>17014562>"Methodology" is just a pretentious way of saying "Method"actually its an incorrect way of saying method so that guy is a retard, and you too kinda but I like your attitude so Ill ignore that part
>>17013178every paper that exists is a guide through the "reproducability" because that's part of the validation process. Not sure what you want exactly, or how you arrived to this concerntroll information
