The ability to reproduce results is an important part of any science experiment. A study is only replicable if the scientist performs the exact same experiment at least twice and .

The ability to reproduce results is an important part of any science. A study is only replicable if the scientist performs the exact same experiment at least twice, collect data in the same way, perform the same data analysis and ultimately arrive at the same conclusions both times.

Explanation:

A study is reproducible if there is a particular arrangement of computational capacities/analysis that precisely recreate the entirety of the numbers in a distributed paper from crude information. It is presently perceived that a basic segment of the scientific process is that data analysis can be repeated. This point has been driven home especially for customized medication applications, where irreproducible outcomes can prompt deferrals in assessing new methodology that influence patients' wellbeing.

An investigation is just replicable on the off chance that you perform precisely the same experiment (at any rate) twice, gather information similarly the multiple times, and come to a similar end results. The distinction with reproducibility is that to accomplish replicability, you need to play out the trial and gather the information once more. This obviously presents a wide range of new potential sources of error in the experiments (new researchers, new materials, new lab, new reasoning, various settings on the machines, and so forth.)

the answer would be b i believe

you didnt put any of the following