Reproducibility Challenges in Computational Network Science: Evidence, Causes, and Recommendations
TL;DR
A taxonomy of reproducibility in CNS is presented, structured around artifact availability, algorithmic clarity, experimental environments, and data processing and experimental pipelines, and recommendations to improve reproducibility are outlined.
Abstract
Reproducibility is essential for scientific progress, enabling validation, fair comparison, and building upon prior work. In computational network science (CNS), however, reproducibility remains limited due to missing code, inaccessible datasets, and insufficient reporting of experimental details. This paper presents a taxonomy of reproducibility in CNS, structured around artifact availability, algorithmic clarity, experimental environments, and data processing and experimental pipelines. To systematically examine these challenges, we conduct four case studies spanning diverse methodological settings: topic-based influential user detection (network science and natural language processing-based methods), influence-based community detection (pure network-based methods), influence maximization (classical, heuristic, approximation, and AI-based mixed approaches), and reinforcement learning for network analysis (learning-based methods). Across these domains, we observe a consistent lack of publicly available artifacts, particularly code and datasets, hindering verification and comparison of results. We identify key causes of this reproducibility gap, including limited incentives for sharing artifacts, data access restrictions, incomplete experimental descriptions, and a complex methodological pipeline. Finally, we outline recommendations to improve reproducibility, including mandatory artifact sharing policies, standardized benchmarks, and comprehensive reporting of experimental setups. Addressing these gaps is critical to ensure transparency, comparability, and sustained progress in computational network science.