Subscribe to the gold package and get unlimited access to Shamra Academy
Register a new userUnderstanding Software in Research: Initial Results from Examining Nature and a Call for Collaboration
37
0
0.0
(
0
)
Added by
Daniel S. Katz
Publication date
2017
fields
Informatics Engineering
and research's language is
English
Ask ChatGPT about the research
No Arabic abstract
This lightning talk paper discusses an initial data set that has been gathered to understand the use of software in research, and is intended to spark wider interest in gathering more data. The initial data analyzes three months of articles in the journal Nature for software mentions. The wider activity that we seek is a community effort to analyze a wider set of articles, including both a longer timespan of Nature articles as well as articles in other journals. Such a collection of data could be used to understand how the role of software has changed over time and how it varies across fields.
rate research
Read More
This document captures the discussion and deliberation of the FAIR for Research Software (FAIR4RS) subgroup that took a fresh look at the applicability of the FAIR Guiding Principles for scientific data management and stewardship for research software. We discuss the vision of research software as ideally reproducible, open, usable, recognized, sustained and robust, and then review both the characteristic and practiced differences of research software and data. This vision and understanding of initial conditions serves as a backdrop for an attempt at translating and interpreting the guiding principles to more fully align with research software. We have found that many of the principles remained relatively intact as written, as long as considerable interpretation was provided. This was particularly the case for the Findable and Accessible foundational principles. We found that Interoperability and Reusability are particularly prone to a broad and sometimes opposing set of interpretations as written. We propose two new principles modeled on existing ones, and provide modified guiding text for these principles to help clarify our final interpretation. A series of gaps in translation were captured during this process, and these remain to be addressed. We finish with a consideration of where these translated principles fall short of the vision laid out in the opening.
Empirical Standards are natural-language models of a scientific communitys expectations for a specific kind of study (e.g. a questionnaire survey). The ACM SIGSOFT Paper and Peer Review Quality Initiative generated empirical standards for research methods commonly used in software engineering. These living documents, which should be continuously revised to reflect evolving consensus around research best practices, will improve research quality and make peer review more effective, reliable, transparent and fair.
Representative sampling appears rare in empirical software engineering research. Not all studies need representative samples, but a general lack of representative sampling undermines a scientific field. This article therefore reports a systematic review of the state of sampling in recent, high-quality software engineering research. The key findings are: (1) random sampling is rare; (2) sophisticated sampling strategies are very rare; (3) sampling, representativeness and randomness often appear misunderstood. These findings suggest that textit{software engineering research has a generalizability crisis}. To address these problems, this paper synthesizes existing knowledge of sampling into a succinct primer and proposes extensive guidelines for improving the conduct, presentation and evaluation of sampling in software engineering research. It is further recommended that while researchers should strive for more representative samples, disparaging non-probability sampling is generally capricious and particularly misguided for predominately qualitative research.
A growing number of researchers suggest that software process must be tailored to a projects context to achieve maximal performance. Researchers have studied context in an ad-hoc way, with focus on those contextual factors that appear to be of significance. The result is that we have no useful basis upon which to contrast and compare studies. We are currently researching a theoretical basis for software context for the purpose of tailoring and note that a deeper consideration of the meaning of the term context is required before we can proceed. In this paper, we examine the term and present a model based on insights gained from our initial categorisation of contextual factors from the literature. We test our understanding by analysing a further six documents. Our contribution thus far is a model that we believe will support a theoretical operationalisation of software context for the purpose of process tailoring.
Nowadays, invoking third party code increasingly involves calling web services via their web APIs, as opposed to the more traditional scenario of downloading a library and invoking the librarys API. However, there are also new challenges for developers calling these web APIs. In this paper, we highlight a broad set of these challenges and argue for resulting opportunities for software engineering research to support developers in consuming web APIs. We outline two specific research threads in this context: (1) web API specification curation, which enables us to know the signatures of web APIs, and (2) static analysis that is capable of extracting URLs, HTTP methods etc. of web API calls. Furthermore, we present new work on how we combine (1) and (2) to provide IDE support for application developers consuming web APIs. As web APIs are used broadly, research in supporting the consumption of web APIs offers exciting opportunities.
Log in to be able to interact and post comments
comments
Fetching comments
Sign in to be able to follow your search criteria
