[Lerc]

As a tangent to the paper topic itself, what should be the standard procedure for publishing data gathering code like this? Given that they don't specify which version of any libraries or APIs used and that updates occur over time, API's change etc. inevitably resulting in code rot. It will eventually be impossible to figure out exactly what this code did.

With meticulous version records it should at least be possible to ascertain what the code did by reconstructing that exact version (assuming stored back versions exist)

[jpeloquin]

In my opinion, archive the data that was actually gathered and the code's intermediate & final outputs. Write the code clearly enough that what it did can be understood by reading it alone, since with pervasive software churn it won't be runnable as-is forever. As a bonus, this approach works even when some steps are manual processes.

[jerpint]

Using a colab with printed outputs could be a good option to at the very least hint to reproducing results independently