mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

AI Copilots for Reproducibility in Science: A Case Study

arXiv 2506.20130 ↗First posted 25 Jun 2025cs.AIcited by 2

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Open science initiatives seek to make research outputs more transparent, accessible, and reusable, but ensuring that published findings can be independently reproduced remains a persistent challenge. In this paper we describe an AI-driven "Reproducibility Copilot" that analyzes manuscripts, code, and supplementary materials to generate structured Jupyter Notebooks and recommendations aimed at facilitating computational, or "rote", reproducibility. Our initial results suggest that the copilot has the potential to substantially reduce reproduction time (in one case from over 30 hours to about 1 hour) while achieving high coverage of figures, tables, and results suitable for computational reproduction. The system systematically detects barriers to reproducibility, including missing values for hyperparameters, undocumented preprocessing steps, and incomplete or inaccessible datasets. Although preliminary, these findings suggest that AI tools can meaningfully reduce the burden of reproducibility efforts and contribute to more transparent and verifiable scientific communication.

Key facts. Cited by 2 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 1 of its 21 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 25 Jun 2025.

Builds on

1 of 21 references.

References · 1

  1. 2022Sources of Irreproducibility in Machine Learning: A Reviewcited by 32

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 14 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2025: 1; 2026: 1.

2 papers.