Referencing landmark study recommended by Reviewer 2

publishing/article/background.tex

@@ -6,8 +6,7 @@ \section{Background}
 
 \subsection{Reexecutable Research}
 
-%TODO yoh cite hurr-durr reproduction crisis article
-Independent verification of published results is a crucial step for establishing and maintaining trust in shared scientific understanding \cite{rpp}.
+Independent verification of published results is a crucial step for establishing and maintaining trust in shared scientific understanding \cite{rpp, Ioannidis2005}.
 The basic feasibility of \textit{de novo} research output generation from the earliest recorded data provenance is known as reexecutability, and  has remained largely unexplored as a distinct phenomenon in the broader sphere of research reproducibility.
 Reexecutability is distinguished from reproducibility, in that the latter refers to obtaining consistent results when re-testing the same phenomenon \textit{NASrepro}, while the former refers to being able to obtain \textit{any} results, automatically, while re-using the same data and instructions.
 While the scope of \textit{reexecution} is thus much narrower than that of \textit{reproduction}, it constitutes a more well-defined and therefore tractable issue in improving the quality and sustainability of research.

publishing/bibliography.bib

@@ -1,3 +1,18 @@
+@article{Ioannidis2005,
+  title = {Why Most Published Research Findings Are False},
+  volume = {2},
+  ISSN = {1549-1676},
+  url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.0020124},
+  DOI = {10.1371/journal.pmed.0020124},
+  number = {8},
+  journal = {PLoS Medicine},
+  publisher = {Public Library of Science (PLoS)},
+  author = {Ioannidis,  John P. A.},
+  year = {2005},
+  month = aug,
+  pages = {e124}
+}
+
 @book{NASrepro,
   title = {Reproducibility and Replicability in Science},
   ISBN = {9780309486163},