ArticleScientific data2025
Metadata practices for simulation workflows.
Article in Scientific data, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Computer simulations are an essential pillar of knowledge generation in science. Exploring, understanding, reproducing, and sharing the results of simulations relies on tracking and organizing the metadata describing the numerical experiments. The models used to understand real-world systems, and the computational machinery required to simulate them, are typically complex, and produce large amounts of heterogeneous metadata. Here, we present general practices for acquiring and handling metadata that are agnostic to software and hardware, and highly flexible for the user. These consist of two steps: 1) recording and storing raw metadata, and 2) selecting and structuring metadata. As a proof of concept, we develop the Archivist, a Python tool to help with the second step, and use it to apply our practices to distinct high-performance computing use cases from neuroscience and hydrology. Our practices and the Archivist can readily be applied to existing workflows without the need for substantial restructuring. They support sustainable numerical workflows, fostering replicability, reproducibility, data exploration, and data sharing in simulation-based research.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.