After Three Months I Cannot Reproduce My Own Book

September 5, 2013

(This article was first published on Yihui Xie, and kindly contributed to R-bloggers)

I thought I could easily jump to a high standard (reproducibility), but I

Some of you may have noticed that the knitr book is finally out. Amazon is
offering a good price
at the
moment, so if you are interested, you’d better hurry up.

I avoided the phrase “Reproducible Research” in the book title, because I
did not want to take that responsibility, although it is related to
reproducible research in some sense. The book was written with knitr v1.3
and R 3.0.1, as you can see from my sessionInfo() in the preface.

Three months later, several things have changed, and I could not reproduce
the book, but that did not surprise me. I’ll explain the details later. Here
I have extracted the first three chapters, and released the corresponding
source files in the knitr-book
repository on Github. You can also find the link to download the PDF there.
This repository may be useful to those who plan to write a book using R.

What I could not reproduce were not really important. The major change in
the recent knitr versions was the syntax highlighting commands, e.g.
\hlcomment{} is \hlcom{} now, and the syntax highlighting has been
improved by the highr package
(sorry, Romain). This change brought a fair amount of changes when I look at
git diff, but these are only cosmetic changes.

I tried my best to avoid writing anything that is likely to change in the
future into the book, but as a naive programmer, I have to say sorry that I
have broken two little features, although they may not really affect you:

  • the preferred way to stop knitr in case of errors is to set the chunk
    option error = FALSE instead of the package option stop_on_error,
    which has been deprecated (Section 6.2.4);
  • for external code chunks (Section 9.2), the preferred chunk delimiter is
    ## ---- instead of ## @knitr now;

Actually the backward-compatibility is still there, so they will not really
break until a long time later.

With exactly the same software environment, I think I can reproduce the
book, but that does not make much sense. Things are always evolving. Then
there are two types of reproducible research:

  1. the “dead” reproducible research (reproduce in a very specific environment);
  2. the reproducible research that evolves and generalizes;

I think the latter is more valuable. Being reproducible alone is not the
goal, because you may be reproducing either real findings or simply old
mistakes. As Roger Peng

[…] reproducibility cannot really address the validity of a scientific claim
as well as replication

Roger’s recent three blog posts on reproducible research are very worth
reading. This blog post of mine is actually not quite relevant (no data
analysis here), so I recommend my readers to move over there after you haved
checked out the knitr-book repository.

To leave a comment for the author, please follow the link and comment on their blog: Yihui Xie. offers daily e-mail updates about R news and tutorials on topics such as: Data science, Big Data, R jobs, visualization (ggplot2, Boxplots, maps, animation), programming (RStudio, Sweave, LaTeX, SQL, Eclipse, git, hadoop, Web Scraping) statistics (regression, PCA, time series, trading) and more...

If you got this far, why not subscribe for updates from the site? Choose your flavor: e-mail, twitter, RSS, or facebook...

Comments are closed.


Mango solutions

RStudio homepage

Zero Inflated Models and Generalized Linear Mixed Models with R

Quantide: statistical consulting and training


CRC R books series

Contact us if you wish to help support R-bloggers, and place your banner here.

Never miss an update!
Subscribe to R-bloggers to receive
e-mails with the latest R posts.
(You will not see this message again.)

Click here to close (This popup will not appear again)