Abstract
As a result of the availability of modern software and hardware, Bayesian analysis is becoming more popular in neutron and X-ray reflectometry analysis. The understandability and replicability of these analyses may be harmed by inconsistencies in how the probability distributions central to Bayesian methods are represented in the literature. Herein advice is provided on how to report the results of Bayesian analysis as applied to neutron and X-ray reflectometry. This includes the clear reporting of initial starting conditions, the prior probabilities, the results of any analysis and the posterior probabilities that are the Bayesian equivalent of the error bar, to enable replicability and improve understanding. It is believed that this advice, grounded in the authors' experience working in the field, will enable greater analytical reproducibility in the work of the reflectometry community, and improve the quality and usability of results.