Structured PREreview of Reproducibility: The New Frontier in AI Governance

Does the introduction explain the objective of the research presented in the preprint?

Yes

Are the methods well-suited for this research?

Neither appropriate nor inappropriate

A method that gathers empirical data on author's claim of low signal to noise ratio in AI (e.g. the proportion of AI research with low statistical power or no report on statistical power or inappropriate use of statistics) would provide a stronger argument for or against limited reproducibility in AI research

Are the conclusions supported by the data?

Neither supported nor unsupported

Table 1 is a reasonable claim. Figure 1 is an indicative chart and although authors explain how this chart was created it is not clear how results from different studies are combined and a final score is determined. Figure 2 provides evidence that is in fact contrary to the authors claim. Authors also state replicability is independent of reproducibility. Therefore, author's claim on reproducibility inferred from figure 2 is limited (as stated in text) .

Are the data presentations, including visualizations, well-suited to represent the data?

Somewhat appropriate and clear

How clearly do the authors discuss, explain, and interpret their findings and potential next steps for the research?

Very clearly

Is the preprint likely to advance academic knowledge?

Somewhat likely

Would it benefit from language editing?

No

Would you recommend this preprint to others?

Yes, but it needs to be improved

Yes but with an analysis of data that quantifies the lack of reproducibility standards, in terms of the variation in research design, sample size/power, inappropriate use of statistics, in AI research

Is it ready for attention from an editor, publisher or broader audience?

Yes, after minor changes

An analysis of data that quantifies the lack of reproducibility standards (in terms of the variation in research design, sample size/power, inappropriate use of statistics) in AI research will strengthen authors claim

Competing interests

The author declares that they have no competing interests.

Use of Artificial Intelligence (AI)

The author declares that they did not use generative AI to come up with new ideas for their review.