The manufactured object belongs in the methods section.
Geometry, materials, sensors, version history, and production checks all shape the experiment.
Build it. Check it. Version it. Cite it. Replicatescience.com
conductscience.com/nih-replicatio…
Conduct Science
699 posts
🔬 ConductScience | Research Tools & Innovation
Advancing AI driven animal behavior analysis, open-access publishing, tech transfer. Posts by PhD's
- Replication can work while each lab runs in its own facility. A distributed core keeps the specifications, versions, procedures, and analysis layer maintained while labs run locally. One verified core. Many independent laboratories. We helped invent the distributed
- A paper is easier to repeat when the method package travels with it. Protocol. Apparatus spec. Analysis code. Dataset. Version history. That is the publishing side of productized replication. conductscience.org
- A lab invention helps replication when it can travel. Technology transfer turns a prototype into a deployable tool with specs, procedure logic, and originating credit preserved. Prototype, credit, and method move together. That's why we won the NIH Replication prize.
- ConductVision turns behavioral video into inspectable data. That's why we won the NIH replication prize. Tracked paths, event boundaries, timestamps, and open exports make it easier for another lab to see what was counted and recompute the measure.
- Manual timing creates drift. We fix that. Thats why we won the NIH Replication Prize. ConductMaze helps turn protocol steps, timing windows, gate states, reward rules, and event logs into something another lab can inspect and repeat. Same protocol. Same timing. Same event log.
- Replying to @ConductScienceThe NIH result gives external proof. The product promise is the part labs feel day to day. Make the equipment clearer. Make the procedure more consistent. Make the analysis easier to inspect.
- Replying to @ConductScienceThe winning submission documented: In laboratories using our standardized apparatus, results from independent control groups varied roughly half as much as the historical multi-laboratory benchmark (Mean coefficient of variation: 0.41 in our cohorts, versus 0.76 in the historical
- Replying to @ConductScienceOur system connects the product pieces: MazeEngineers apparatuses, ConductMaze procedure automation and ConductVision analysis Method records The goal is simple: fewer hidden differences between labs.
- Replying to @ConductScienceSmall product details affect replication. A maze dimension. A sensor position. A timing rule. A camera angle. A scoring definition. Those details decide whether the next lab can run the same method.
- ConductScience and MazeEngineers have been named winners of the NIH Common Fund Replication Prize, Track 2: Replication Exemplars. For labs, this is about products that make behavioral methods easier to repeat.
- We've been supplying labs for years. The hardest problem was never the equipment. It was that researchers couldn't get from a published paper to a protocol they could actually run. @ShuHanHe built the fix.I am a physician and a researcher. I also build software. And the longer I spent in all three of those worlds, the more one thing became impossible to ignore: science methodology is the most important part of research, and it is the least developed as infrastructure. Inreplicatescience.comReplicateScienceTransform open-access scientific papers into structured, reproducible experimental protocols.
- The first PCR machine at Cetus Corporation in 1983 was built from water baths on a lab bench. Kary Mullis moved test tubes between them by hand, repeatedly, for hours. Mullis needed DNA to copy itself without cloning bacteria, which took weeks and failed constantly. The











