A Vision on Open Science for the Evolution of Software Engineering Research and Practice
Authors: 
Edson OliveiraJr, Fernanda Madeiral, Alcemir Rodrigues Santos, Christina von Flach, 
Sergio SoaresAuthors Info & Claims
Edson OliveiraJr, Fernanda Madeiral, Alcemir Rodrigues Santos, Christina von Flach, Sergio SoaresAuthors Info & ClaimsPages 512 - 516
Abstract
Open Science aims to foster openness and collaboration in research, leading to more significant scientific and social impact. However, practicing Open Science comes with several challenges and is currently not properly rewarded. In this paper, we share our vision for addressing those challenges through a conceptual framework that connects essential building blocks for a change in the Software Engineering community, both culturally and technically. The idea behind this framework is that Open Science is treated as a first-class requirement for better Software Engineering research, practice, recognition, and relevant social impact. There is a long road for us, as a community, to truly embrace and gain from the benefits of Open Science. Nevertheless, we shed light on the directions for promoting the necessary culture shift and empowering the Software Engineering community.
References
[1]
ACM. 2020. Artifact Review and Badging. https://www.acm.org/publications/policies/artifact-review-badging [Online; accessed 2024-01-25]
[2]
Mark Ardis, David Budgen, Gregory W. Hislop, Jeff Offutt, Mark Sebern, and Willem Visser. 2015. SE 2014: Curriculum Guidelines for Undergraduate Degree Programs in Software Engineering. Computer, 48, 11 (2015), 106–109. https://doi.org/10.1109/MC.2015.345
[3]
Sönke Bartling and Sascha Friesike. 2014. Towards Another Scientific Revolution. Springer International Publishing, Cham. 3–15. isbn:978-3-319-00026-8 https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-00026-8_1
[4]
The Carpentries. 2023. The Carpentries. https://carpentries.org/ [Online; accessed 2024-01-25]
[5]
Dalmeet Singh Chawla. 2021. Nature Index: “Scientists at odds on Utrecht University reforms to hiring and promotion criteria”. https://www.nature.com/nature-index/news/scientists-argue-over-use-of-impact-factors-for-evaluating-research [Online; accessed 2024-01-25]
[6]
Fernando Chirigati, Rémi Rampin, Dennis Shasha, and Juliana Freire. 2016. ReproZip: Computational Reproducibility With Ease. In Proc. the 2016 International Conference on Management of Data (SIGMOD ’16). ACM, New York, NY, USA. 2085–2088. isbn:9781450335317 https://doi.org/10.1145/2882903.2899401
[7]
Neil P. Chue Hong, Daniel S. Katz, and Michelle Barker. 2022. FAIR Principles for Research Software (FAIR4RS Principles). https://doi.org/10.15497/RDA00068
[8]
Jeremy Cohen, Daniel S. Katz, Michelle Barker, Neil Chue Hong, Robert Haines, and Caroline Jay. 2021. The Four Pillars of Research Software Engineering. IEEE Software, 38, 1 (2021), 97–105. https://doi.org/10.1109/MS.2020.2973362
[9]
European Commission, Directorate-General for Research and Innovation, Cecili Cabello Valdes, Bernard Rentier, and Eeva Kaunismaa. 2017. Evaluation of research careers fully acknowledging Open Science practices: Rewards, incentives and/or recognition for researchers practicing Open Science. Publications Office, Europe. https://doi.org/10.2777/75255
[10]
RCP Consortium. 2024. Princeton Research Computing – Research Software Engineering. https://researchcomputing.princeton.edu/services/research-software-engineering [Online; accessed 2024-01-27]
[11]
André Cordeiro and Edson OliveiraJr. 2021. Open Science Practices for Software Engineering Controlled Experiments and Quasi-Experiments. In Proc. of the 1st Workshop on Open Science Practices for Software Engineering (OpenScienSE ’21). SBC, Porto Alegre, Brazil. 19–21. https://doi.org/10.5753/opensciense.2021.17140
[12]
André Felipe R. Cordeiro. 2022. An Open Science-Based Framework for Managing Experimental Data in Software Engineering. In Proc. of the 26th International Conference on Evaluation and Assessment in Software Engineering (EASE ’22). ACM, New York, NY, USA. 342–346. isbn:9781450396134 https://doi.org/10.1145/3530019.3535348
[13]
Thomas Durieux. 2023. Anonymous GitHub. https://anonymous.4open.science/ [Online; accessed 2024-01-25]
[14]
Neil A. Ernst and Maria Teresa Baldassarre. 2023. Registered reports in software engineering. Empirical Software Engineering, 28, 2 (2023), mar, 11 pages. issn:1382-3256 https://doi.org/10.1007/s10664-022-10277-5
[15]
FOSTER. 2023. The FOSTER Portal: Open Science Training Courses. https://www.fosteropenscience.eu/toolkit [Online; accessed 2024-01-25]
[16]
Jesus M. Gonzalez-Barahona and Gregorio Robles. 2023. Revisiting the reproducibility of empirical software engineering studies based on data retrieved from development repositories. Information and Software Technology, 164 (2023), 107318. issn:0950-5849 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.infsof.2023.107318
[17]
Richard A. Guzzo, Benjamin Schneider, and Haig R. Nalbantian. 2022. Open science, closed doors: The perils and potential of open science for research in practice. Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 15, 4 (2022), 495–515. https://doi.org/10.1017/iop.2022.61
[18]
Simon Hettrick, Mario Antonioletti, Les Carr, Neil Chue Hong, Stephen Crouch, David De Roure, Iain Emsley, Carole Goble, Alexander Hay, Devasena Inupakutika, Mike Jackson, Aleksandra Nenadic, Tim Parkinson, Mark I Parsons, Aleksandra Pawlik, Giacomo Peru, Arno Proeme, John Robinson, and Shoaib Sufi. 2015. UK Research Software Survey 2014. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.14809
[19]
James Howison and James D. Herbsleb. 2011. Scientific software production: incentives and collaboration. In Proc. of the ACM 2011 Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW ’11). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA. 513–522. isbn:9781450305563 https://doi.org/10.1145/1958824.1958904
[20]
James Howison and James D. Herbsleb. 2013. Incentives and integration in scientific software production. In Proc. of the 2013 Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW ’13). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA. 459–470. isbn:9781450313315 https://doi.org/10.1145/2441776.2441828
[21]
D. S. Katz and S. Hettrick. 2023. Research Software Engineering in 2030. In 2023 IEEE Conference on eScience. IEEE, New York. 1–2. https://doi.org/10.1109/e-Science58273.2023.10254813
[22]
Daniel S. Katz, Neil P. Chue Hong, and Tim Clark. 2021. Recognizing the value of software: a software citation guide [version 2; peer review: 2 approved]. F1000Research, 9, 1257 (2021), 13 pages. https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.26932.2
[23]
Nadine Levin, Sabina Leonelli, Dagmara Weckowska, David Castle, and John Dupré. 2016. How Do Scientists Define Openness? Exploring the Relationship Between Open Science Policies and Research Practice. Bulletin of Science, Technology & Society, 36, 2 (2016), 128–141. https://doi.org/10.1177/0270467616668760
[24]
Daniel Mendez, Daniel Graziotin, Stefan Wagner, and Heidi Seibold. 2020. Open Science in Software Engineering. Springer International Publishing, Cham. 477–501. isbn:978-3-030-32489-6 https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-32489-6_17
[25]
Marcus R. Munafò, Brian A. Nosek, and Dorothy V. M. Bishop. 2017. A manifesto for reproducible science. Nature Human Behaviour, 1, 1 (2017), 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-016-0021
[26]
National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2018. Open Science by Design: Realizing a Vision for 21st Century Research. The National Academies Press, Washington, USA. https://doi.org/10.17226/25116
[27]
Edson OliveiraJr, Viviane Furtado, Henrique Vignando, Carlos Luz, André Cordeiro, Igor Steinmacher, and Avelino Zorzo. 2021. Towards Improving Experimentation in Software Engineering. In Proc. of the XXXV Brazilian Symposium on Software Engineering (SBES ’21). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA. 335–340. isbn:9781450390613 https://doi.org/10.1145/3474624.3477073
[28]
OpenAire. 2024. OpenAire - Open Science in Europe. https://www.openaire.eu/projects [Online; accessed 2024-01-25]
[29]
OpenSciency Contributors. 2023. Opensciency - A core open science curriculum by and for the research community. Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.7662732
[30]
Showmick Guha Paul, Arpa Saha, Mohammad Shamsul Arefin, Touhid Bhuiyan, Al Amin Biswas, Ahmed Wasif Reza, Naif M. Alotaibi, Salem A. Alyami, and Mohammad Ali Moni. 2023. A Comprehensive Review of Green Computing: Past, Present, and Future Research. IEEE Access, 11 (2023), 87445–87494. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2023.3304332
[31]
João Felipe Pimentel, Leonardo Murta, Vanessa Braganholo, and Juliana Freire. 2017. noWorkflow: a tool for collecting, analyzing, and managing provenance from python scripts. Proc. of the VLDB Endowment, 10, 12 (2017), aug, 1841–1844. issn:2150-8097 https://doi.org/10.14778/3137765.3137789
[32]
Remi Rampin, Fernando Chirigati, Vicky Steeves, and Juliana Freire. 2018. ReproServer: Making Reproducibility Easier and Less Intensive. arxiv:1808.01406.
[33]
RSE.org. 2024. Society of Research Software Engineering. https://society-rse.org [Online; accessed 2024-01-27]
[34]
RSE.Shef. 2024. Research Software Engineering Sheffield. https://rse.shef.ac.uk [Online; accessed 2024-01-27]
[35]
Filipe Santana, André Cordeiro, and Edson OliveiraJr. 2023. Use of the Dublin Core Standard to Express Open Metadata Related to Software Engineering Experiments. In Proc. of the 3rd Workshop on Open Science Practices for Software Engineering (OpenScienSE ’23). SBC, Porto Alegre, Brazil. 1–5. issn:0000-0000 https://doi.org/10.5753/opensciense.2023.235672
[36]
Alcemir Santos. 2021. Open scientist in the wonderland: advocating for blockchain-based decentralized applications for science. In Proc. of the 1st Workshop on Open Science Practices for Software Engineering (OpenScienSE ’21). SBC, Porto Alegre, Brazil. 34–36. issn:0000-0000 https://doi.org/10.5753/opensciense.2021.17143
[37]
Heidi Seibold. 2024. Avoiding fraud and improving rigor through Open Science. https://doi.org/10.34734/FZJ-2024-00813 Blog post
[38]
Scientific United Nations Educational and Cultural Organization (UNESCO). 2021. UNESCO Recommendation on Open Science. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5834767
[39]
US-RSE.org. 2022. Education and Training for Research Software Engineers. https://us-rse.org/2022-08-01-education-training/ [Online; accessed 2024-01-25]
[40]
Igor Wiese, Ivanilton Polato, and Gustavo Pinto. 2020. Naming the Pain in Developing Scientific Software. IEEE Software, 37, 4 (2020), 75–82. https://doi.org/10.1109/MS.2019.2899838
[41]
Mark D. Wilkinson, Michel Dumontier, and IJsbrand Jan Aalbersberg. 2016. The FAIR Guiding Principles for Scientific Data Management and Stewardship. Scientific Data, 3 (2016), 9 pages. issn:2052-4463 https://doi.org/10.1038/sdata.2016.18
[42]
WOSSS. 2024. Workshop on Sustainable Software Sustainability (WoSSS). https://wosss.org [Online; accessed 2024-01-25]
Index Terms
- A Vision on Open Science for the Evolution of Software Engineering Research and Practice
Recommendations
Understanding Equity, Diversity and Inclusion Challenges Within the Research Software Community
Computational Science – ICCS 2021AbstractResearch software – specialist software used to support or undertake research – is of huge importance to researchers. It contributes to significant advances in the wider world and requires collaboration between people with diverse skills and ...
Unlocking open science in Africa: Mentorship and grassroot community building
NISOPlus 2023Open Science is becoming increasingly popular among scientists worldwide, but African researchers have hesitated to adopt it. This keynote speech addresses the current state of open science in Africa and the challenges researchers face in implementing ...
Reflections on Software Engineering Education
In recent years, the software engineering community has focused on organizing its existing knowledge and finding opportunities to transform that knowledge into a university curriculum. SWEBOK (the Guide to the Software Engineering Body of Knowledge) and ...
Comments
Information & Contributors
Information
Published In
Copyright © 2024 Copyright is held by the owner/author(s). Publication rights licensed to ACM.
Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than the author(s) must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected].
Sponsors
Publisher
Association for Computing Machinery
New York, NY, United States
Publication History
Published: 10 July 2024
Check for updates
Author Tags
Qualifiers
- Research-article
Funding Sources
- CNPq
- European Commission
- NWO
- INES
- FACEPE
- CAPES
Conference
FSE '24
Sponsor:
FSE '24: 32nd ACM International Conference on the Foundations of Software Engineering
July 15 - 19, 2024
Porto de Galinhas, Brazil
Acceptance Rates
Overall Acceptance Rate 112 of 543 submissions, 21%
Contributors
Other Metrics
Bibliometrics & Citations
Bibliometrics
Article Metrics
- 0Total Citations
- 39Total Downloads
- Downloads (Last 12 months)39
- Downloads (Last 6 weeks)9
Reflects downloads up to 10 Nov 2024
Other Metrics
Citations
View Options
Get Access
Login options
Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.
Sign in