I like the idea of splitting "peer review" into two, and then having a citation threshold standard where a field agrees that a paper should be replicated after a certain number of citations. And journals should have a dedicated section for attempted replications.
1. Rebrand peer review as a "readability review" which is what reviewers tend to focus on today.
2. A "replicability statement", a separately published document where reviewers push authors to go into detail about the methodology and strategy used to perform the experiments, including specifics that someone outside of their specialty may not know. Credit NalNezumi ITT
1. Rebrand peer review as a "readability review" which is what reviewers tend to focus on today.
2. A "replicability statement", a separately published document where reviewers push authors to go into detail about the methodology and strategy used to perform the experiments, including specifics that someone outside of their specialty may not know. Credit NalNezumi ITT