↓ Skip to main content

An automated and reproducible workflow for running and analyzing neural simulations using Lancet and IPython Notebook

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Neuroinformatics, January 2013
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Readers on

mendeley
58 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
An automated and reproducible workflow for running and analyzing neural simulations using Lancet and IPython Notebook
Published in
Frontiers in Neuroinformatics, January 2013
DOI 10.3389/fninf.2013.00044
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jean-Luc R. Stevens, Marco Elver, James A. Bednar

Abstract

Lancet is a new, simulator-independent Python utility for succinctly specifying, launching, and collating results from large batches of interrelated computationally demanding program runs. This paper demonstrates how to combine Lancet with IPython Notebook to provide a flexible, lightweight, and agile workflow for fully reproducible scientific research. This informal and pragmatic approach uses IPython Notebook to capture the steps in a scientific computation as it is gradually automated and made ready for publication, without mandating the use of any separate application that can constrain scientific exploration and innovation. The resulting notebook concisely records each step involved in even very complex computational processes that led to a particular figure or numerical result, allowing the complete chain of events to be replicated automatically. Lancet was originally designed to help solve problems in computational neuroscience, such as analyzing the sensitivity of a complex simulation to various parameters, or collecting the results from multiple runs with different random starting points. However, because it is never possible to know in advance what tools might be required in future tasks, Lancet has been designed to be completely general, supporting any type of program as long as it can be launched as a process and can return output in the form of files. For instance, Lancet is also heavily used by one of the authors in a separate research group for launching batches of microprocessor simulations. This general design will allow Lancet to continue supporting a given research project even as the underlying approaches and tools change.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 58 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Germany 1 2%
Australia 1 2%
Brazil 1 2%
India 1 2%
Russia 1 2%
United States 1 2%
Unknown 52 90%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 20 34%
Researcher 11 19%
Professor > Associate Professor 7 12%
Student > Postgraduate 3 5%
Student > Master 3 5%
Other 9 16%
Unknown 5 9%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Computer Science 22 38%
Engineering 7 12%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 10%
Neuroscience 4 7%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 2 3%
Other 12 21%
Unknown 5 9%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 19 March 2014.
All research outputs
#19,701,336
of 24,226,848 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Neuroinformatics
#662
of 795 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#226,695
of 289,058 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Neuroinformatics
#33
of 36 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,226,848 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 795 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.0. This one is in the 9th percentile – i.e., 9% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 289,058 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 36 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.