OBJECTIVE: Like all scientific research, computational neuroscience research must be reproducible. Big data science, including simulation research, cannot depend exclusively on journal articles as the method to provide the sharing and transparency required for reproducibility. METHODS: Ensuring model reproducibility requires the use of multiple standard software practices and tools, including version control, strong commenting and documentation, and code modularity. RESULTS: Building on these standard practices, model-sharing sites and tools have been developed that fit into several categories: 1) standardized neural simulators; 2) shared computational resources; 3) declarative model descriptors, ontologies, and standardized annotations; and 4) model-sharing repositories and sharing standards. CONCLUSION: A number of complementary innovations have been proposed to enhance sharing, transparency, and reproducibility. The individual user can be encouraged to make use of version control, commenting, documentation, and modularity in development of models. The community can help by requiring model sharing as a condition of publication and funding. SIGNIFICANCE: Model management will become increasingly important as multiscale models become larger, more detailed, and correspondingly more difficult to manage by any single investigator or single laboratory. Additional big data management complexity will come as the models become more useful in interpreting experiments, thus increasing the need to ensure clear alignment between modeling data, both parameters and results, and experiment.
OBJECTIVE: Like all scientific research, computational neuroscience research must be reproducible. Big data science, including simulation research, cannot depend exclusively on journal articles as the method to provide the sharing and transparency required for reproducibility. METHODS: Ensuring model reproducibility requires the use of multiple standard software practices and tools, including version control, strong commenting and documentation, and code modularity. RESULTS: Building on these standard practices, model-sharing sites and tools have been developed that fit into several categories: 1) standardized neural simulators; 2) shared computational resources; 3) declarative model descriptors, ontologies, and standardized annotations; and 4) model-sharing repositories and sharing standards. CONCLUSION: A number of complementary innovations have been proposed to enhance sharing, transparency, and reproducibility. The individual user can be encouraged to make use of version control, commenting, documentation, and modularity in development of models. The community can help by requiring model sharing as a condition of publication and funding. SIGNIFICANCE: Model management will become increasingly important as multiscale models become larger, more detailed, and correspondingly more difficult to manage by any single investigator or single laboratory. Additional big data management complexity will come as the models become more useful in interpreting experiments, thus increasing the need to ensure clear alignment between modeling data, both parameters and results, and experiment.
Authors: Michael L Hines; Thomas Morse; Michele Migliore; Nicholas T Carnevale; Gordon M Shepherd Journal: J Comput Neurosci Date: 2004 Jul-Aug Impact factor: 1.621
Authors: Hanchuan Peng; Michael Hawrylycz; Jane Roskams; Sean Hill; Nelson Spruston; Erik Meijering; Giorgio A Ascoli Journal: Neuron Date: 2015-07-15 Impact factor: 17.173
Authors: Nicolas Le Novère; Benjamin Bornstein; Alexander Broicher; Mélanie Courtot; Marco Donizelli; Harish Dharuri; Lu Li; Herbert Sauro; Maria Schilstra; Bruce Shapiro; Jacky L Snoep; Michael Hucka Journal: Nucleic Acids Res Date: 2006-01-01 Impact factor: 16.971
Authors: Michael Vella; Robert C Cannon; Sharon Crook; Andrew P Davison; Gautham Ganapathy; Hugh P C Robinson; R Angus Silver; Padraig Gleeson Journal: Front Neuroinform Date: 2014-04-23 Impact factor: 4.081
Authors: William W Lytton; Alexandra H Seidenstein; Salvador Dura-Bernal; Robert A McDougal; Felix Schürmann; Michael L Hines Journal: Neural Comput Date: 2016-08-24 Impact factor: 2.026
Authors: Jasper Albers; Jari Pronold; Anno Christopher Kurth; Stine Brekke Vennemo; Kaveh Haghighi Mood; Alexander Patronis; Dennis Terhorst; Jakob Jordan; Susanne Kunkel; Tom Tetzlaff; Markus Diesmann; Johanna Senk Journal: Front Neuroinform Date: 2022-05-11 Impact factor: 3.739
Authors: Damian O Eke; Amy Bernard; Jan G Bjaalie; Ricardo Chavarriaga; Takashi Hanakawa; Anthony J Hannan; Sean L Hill; Maryann E Martone; Agnes McMahon; Oliver Ruebel; Sharon Crook; Edda Thiels; Franco Pestilli Journal: Neuron Date: 2021-12-15 Impact factor: 18.688
Authors: Robert A McDougal; Thomas M Morse; Ted Carnevale; Luis Marenco; Rixin Wang; Michele Migliore; Perry L Miller; Gordon M Shepherd; Michael L Hines Journal: J Comput Neurosci Date: 2016-09-15 Impact factor: 1.621
Authors: Lealem Mulugeta; Andrew Drach; Ahmet Erdemir; C A Hunt; Marc Horner; Joy P Ku; Jerry G Myers; Rajanikanth Vadigepalli; William W Lytton Journal: Front Neuroinform Date: 2018-04-16 Impact factor: 4.081
Authors: William W Lytton; Jeff Arle; Georgiy Bobashev; Songbai Ji; Tara L Klassen; Vasilis Z Marmarelis; James Schwaber; Mohamed A Sherif; Terence D Sanger Journal: Brain Inform Date: 2017-05-09