Open Science does not automatically mean Reproducibility
* Presenting author
With the advent of Open Science, researchers start to publish their research artefacts in order to allow others to reproduce their investigations. While this is good for science in general, the publication often lacks a comprehensive documentation and completeness with respect to the artefacts, which in turn prevents the successful reproduction of the analyses. Typical examples are missing scripts, incomplete datasets or specification of used software. Moreover, issues about licences often create legal concerns. This is true for the use of commercial software but also for the publication of research artefacts without proper sharing licence. As a result, the sole publication of research artefacts does not automatically result in reproducible research.To empirically confirm this, we analysed research artefacts that were published. Indeed, the preliminary results suggest that despite the public availability of research artefacts, the investigations could not easily be reproduced. We discuss the reasons for lacking reproducibility and potential solutions. Based on the analysis, we propose the use of virtual research environments which help researchers to collect information about their research artefacts during the entire research life cycle. These information can then be used to document the provenance of the research artefacts.