Reproducibility in machine‐learning‐based research: Overview, barriers, and drivers

Abstract Many research fields are currently reckoning with issues of poor levels of reproducibility. Some label it a “crisis,” and research employing or building machine learning (ML) models is no exception. Issues including lack of transparency, data or code, poor adherence to standards, and the sensitivity of ML training conditions mean that many papers are not even reproducible in principle. Where they are, though, reproducibility experiments have found worryingly low degrees of similarity with original results. Despite previous appeals from ML researchers on this topic and various initiatives from conference reproducibility tracks to the ACM's new Emerging Interest Group on Reproducibility and Replicability, we contend that the general community continues to take this issue too lightly. Poor reproducibility threatens trust in and integrity of research results. Therefore, in this article, we lay out a new perspective on the key barriers and drivers (both procedural and technical) to increased reproducibility at various levels (methods, code, data, and experiments). We then map the drivers to the barriers to give concrete advice for strategies for researchers to mitigate reproducibility issues in their own work, to lay out key areas where further research is needed in specific areas, and to further ignite discussion on the threat presented by these urgent issues.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
AI Magazine
Published
2025-04-14
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1002/aaai.70002
Citations
32
Primary Topic
Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI)
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
79.39

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Reproducibility in machine‐learning‐based research: Overview, barriers, and drivers

Harald Semmelrock, Stefan Thalmann, Armin Haberl, Dieter Theiler et al.
32 citations
AI Magazine
Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI)
79.39
article

Reproducibility in machine‐learning‐based research: Overview, barriers, and drivers

Harald Semmelrock, Stefan Thalmann, Armin Haberl, Dieter Theiler, Dominik Kowald, Tony Ross‐Hellauer, Simone Kopeinik
article en
32 citations

Abstract

Abstract Many research fields are currently reckoning with issues of poor levels of reproducibility. Some label it a “crisis,” and research employing or building machine learning (ML) models is no exception. Issues including lack of transparency, data or code, poor adherence to standards, and the sensitivity of ML training conditions mean that many papers are not even reproducible in principle. Where they are, though, reproducibility experiments have found worryingly low degrees of similarity with original results. Despite previous appeals from ML researchers on this topic and various initiatives from conference reproducibility tracks to the ACM's new Emerging Interest Group on Reproducibility and Replicability, we contend that the general community continues to take this issue too lightly. Poor reproducibility threatens trust in and integrity of research results. Therefore, in this article, we lay out a new perspective on the key barriers and drivers (both procedural and technical) to increased reproducibility at various levels (methods, code, data, and experiments). We then map the drivers to the barriers to give concrete advice for strategies for researchers to mitigate reproducibility issues in their own work, to lay out key areas where further research is needed in specific areas, and to further ignite discussion on the threat presented by these urgent issues.

AI MagazineVol. 46(2)
University of Graz (AT), Graz University of Technology (AT), Know Center Research GmbH (Austria) (AT)
HORIZON EUROPE Framework Programme
Openalex Percentile: Top 0%
Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI)
79.39
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.