Get StartedReproducibility Categories
RepoReady evaluates research repositories against reproducibility best practices and assigns one of four categories based on the analysis results.
Excellent
The repository demonstrates exemplary reproducibility practices.
Additional requirements
- Tests exist to verify code functionality
- Automated data download scripts are provided
- Citation instructions are included (CITATION.cff or similar)
- License file is present and appropriate
Good
The repository is well-documented and structured for reproducibility.
Additional requirements
- Environment specification exists (requirements.txt, environment.yml, etc.)
- Good repository structure with clear organization
- Code for every output/figure in the paper can be identified
- No missing data inputs or undocumented manual steps
- Random seeding is documented and reported
Fair
The repository meets basic reproducibility requirements.
Requirements
- A README file exists with setup/usage instructions
- Code appears to be present for the analysis described in the connected paper
- No obvious problems with test set leakage detected
Poor
The repository does not meet minimum reproducibility standards.
Common Issues
- Missing installation and usage instructions
- Missing code for parts of the manuscript results
- Potential test set leakage issues
- ...
How Categories Are Determined
RepoReady analyzes your repository using a combination of automated checks and AI-powered analysis:
- 1Documentation checks: README completeness, installation instructions, usage examples
- 2Code quality: Environment specifications, dependency management, code organization
- 3Reproducibility practices: Random seeding, data availability, test coverage
- 4Paper alignment: Code coverage for figures and results (when manuscript is provided)
Ready to check your repository?
Get a detailed reproducibility report and actionable recommendations for improvement.