Engineering Academic Software

Alice  Allen; Cecilia  Aragon; Christoph Becker; Jeffrey Carver; Andrei   Chis; Benoit  Combemale; Mike  Croucher; Kevin  Crowston; Daniel  Garijo; Ashish  Gehani; Carole Goble; Robert Haines; Robert M A Hirschfeld; James Howison; Kathryn  Huff; Caroline Jay; Daniel S.  Katz; Claude Kirchner; Katie  Kuksenok; Ralf  Lämmel; Oscar  Nierstrasz; Matt  Turk; Rob  van Nieuwpoort; Matthew  Vaughn; Jurgen J.  Vinju

doi:10.4230/DagMan.6.1.1

Engineering Academic Software

Alice Allen, Cecilia Aragon , Christoph Becker, Jeffrey Carver, Andrei Chis, Benoit Combemale, Mike Croucher, Kevin Crowston, Daniel Garijo, Ashish Gehani, Carole Goble, Robert Haines, Robert M A Hirschfeld, James Howison , Kathryn Huff, Caroline Jay, Daniel S. Katz, Claude Kirchner, Katie Kuksenok , Ralf LämmelOscar Nierstrasz, Matt Turk, Rob van Nieuwpoort, Matthew Vaughn, Jurgen J. Vinju

Research output: Chapter in Book/Conference proceeding › Conference contribution › peer-review

17 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

Software is often a critical component of scientific research. It can be a component of the academic research methods used to produce research results, or it may itself be an academic research result. Software, however, has rarely been considered to be a citable artifact in its own right. With the advent of open-source software, artifact evaluation committees of conferences, and journals that include source code and running systems as part of the published artifacts, we
foresee that software will increasingly be recognized as part of the academic process. The quality and sustainability of this software must be accounted for, both a priori and a posteriori.
The Dagstuhl Perspectives Workshop on “Engineering Academic Software” has examined the strengths, weaknesses, risks, and opportunities of academic software engineering. A key outcome of the workshop is this Dagstuhl Manifesto, serving as a roadmap towards future professional
software engineering for software-based research instruments and other software produced and used in an academic context. The manifesto is expressed in terms of a series of actionable “pledges” that users and developers of academic research software can take as concrete steps
towards improving the environment in which that software is produced.

Original language	English
Title of host publication	Manifesto from Dagstuhl Perspectives Workshop June 19–24, 2016
Pages	1-20
Volume	6
Edition	1
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.4230/DagMan.6.1.1
Publication status	Published - 2017

Keywords

Academic software
Research software
Software citation
Software sustainability

Access to Document

10.4230/DagMan.6.1.1Licence: CC BY

http://drops.dagstuhl.de/opus/volltexte/2017/7146/

Cite this

Allen, A., Aragon , C., Becker, C., Carver, J., Chis, A., Combemale, B., Croucher, M., Crowston, K., Garijo, D., Gehani, A., Goble, C., Haines, R., Hirschfeld, R. M. A., Howison , J., Huff, K., Jay, C., Katz, D. S., Kirchner, C., Kuksenok , K., ... Vinju, J. J. (2017). Engineering Academic Software. In Manifesto from Dagstuhl Perspectives Workshop June 19–24, 2016 (1 ed., Vol. 6, pp. 1-20) https://doi.org/10.4230/DagMan.6.1.1

@inproceedings{66078e4399dd43bcb3e5ee2b79e599c5,

title = "Engineering Academic Software",

abstract = "Software is often a critical component of scientific research. It can be a component of the academic research methods used to produce research results, or it may itself be an academic research result. Software, however, has rarely been considered to be a citable artifact in its own right. With the advent of open-source software, artifact evaluation committees of conferences, and journals that include source code and running systems as part of the published artifacts, weforesee that software will increasingly be recognized as part of the academic process. The quality and sustainability of this software must be accounted for, both a priori and a posteriori.The Dagstuhl Perspectives Workshop on “Engineering Academic Software” has examined the strengths, weaknesses, risks, and opportunities of academic software engineering. A key outcome of the workshop is this Dagstuhl Manifesto, serving as a roadmap towards future professionalsoftware engineering for software-based research instruments and other software produced and used in an academic context. The manifesto is expressed in terms of a series of actionable “pledges” that users and developers of academic research software can take as concrete stepstowards improving the environment in which that software is produced.",

keywords = "Academic software , Research software , Software citation, Software sustainability ",

author = "Alice Allen and Cecilia Aragon and Christoph Becker and Jeffrey Carver and Andrei Chis and Benoit Combemale and Mike Croucher and Kevin Crowston and Daniel Garijo and Ashish Gehani and Carole Goble and Robert Haines and Hirschfeld, {Robert M A} and James Howison and Kathryn Huff and Caroline Jay and Katz, {Daniel S.} and Claude Kirchner and Katie Kuksenok and Ralf L{\"a}mmel and Oscar Nierstrasz and Matt Turk and {van Nieuwpoort}, Rob and Matthew Vaughn and Vinju, {Jurgen J.}",

year = "2017",

doi = "10.4230/DagMan.6.1.1",

language = "English",

volume = "6",

pages = "1--20",

booktitle = "Manifesto from Dagstuhl Perspectives Workshop June 19–24, 2016",

edition = "1",

}

Allen, A, Aragon , C, Becker, C, Carver, J, Chis, A, Combemale, B, Croucher, M, Crowston, K, Garijo, D, Gehani, A, Goble, C , Haines, R, Hirschfeld, RMA, Howison , J, Huff, K, Jay, C, Katz, DS, Kirchner, C, Kuksenok , K, Lämmel, R, Nierstrasz, O, Turk, M, van Nieuwpoort, R, Vaughn, M & Vinju, JJ 2017, Engineering Academic Software. in Manifesto from Dagstuhl Perspectives Workshop June 19–24, 2016. 1 edn, vol. 6, pp. 1-20. https://doi.org/10.4230/DagMan.6.1.1

TY - GEN

T1 - Engineering Academic Software

AU - Allen, Alice

AU - Aragon , Cecilia

AU - Becker, Christoph

AU - Carver, Jeffrey

AU - Chis, Andrei

AU - Combemale, Benoit

AU - Croucher, Mike

AU - Crowston, Kevin

AU - Garijo, Daniel

AU - Gehani, Ashish

AU - Goble, Carole

AU - Haines, Robert

AU - Hirschfeld, Robert M A

AU - Howison , James

AU - Huff, Kathryn

AU - Jay, Caroline

AU - Katz, Daniel S.

AU - Kirchner, Claude

AU - Kuksenok , Katie

AU - Lämmel, Ralf

AU - Nierstrasz, Oscar

AU - Turk, Matt

AU - van Nieuwpoort, Rob

AU - Vaughn, Matthew

AU - Vinju, Jurgen J.

PY - 2017

Y1 - 2017

N2 - Software is often a critical component of scientific research. It can be a component of the academic research methods used to produce research results, or it may itself be an academic research result. Software, however, has rarely been considered to be a citable artifact in its own right. With the advent of open-source software, artifact evaluation committees of conferences, and journals that include source code and running systems as part of the published artifacts, weforesee that software will increasingly be recognized as part of the academic process. The quality and sustainability of this software must be accounted for, both a priori and a posteriori.The Dagstuhl Perspectives Workshop on “Engineering Academic Software” has examined the strengths, weaknesses, risks, and opportunities of academic software engineering. A key outcome of the workshop is this Dagstuhl Manifesto, serving as a roadmap towards future professionalsoftware engineering for software-based research instruments and other software produced and used in an academic context. The manifesto is expressed in terms of a series of actionable “pledges” that users and developers of academic research software can take as concrete stepstowards improving the environment in which that software is produced.

AB - Software is often a critical component of scientific research. It can be a component of the academic research methods used to produce research results, or it may itself be an academic research result. Software, however, has rarely been considered to be a citable artifact in its own right. With the advent of open-source software, artifact evaluation committees of conferences, and journals that include source code and running systems as part of the published artifacts, weforesee that software will increasingly be recognized as part of the academic process. The quality and sustainability of this software must be accounted for, both a priori and a posteriori.The Dagstuhl Perspectives Workshop on “Engineering Academic Software” has examined the strengths, weaknesses, risks, and opportunities of academic software engineering. A key outcome of the workshop is this Dagstuhl Manifesto, serving as a roadmap towards future professionalsoftware engineering for software-based research instruments and other software produced and used in an academic context. The manifesto is expressed in terms of a series of actionable “pledges” that users and developers of academic research software can take as concrete stepstowards improving the environment in which that software is produced.

KW - Academic software

KW - Research software

KW - Software citation

KW - Software sustainability

U2 - 10.4230/DagMan.6.1.1

DO - 10.4230/DagMan.6.1.1

M3 - Conference contribution

VL - 6

SP - 1

EP - 20

BT - Manifesto from Dagstuhl Perspectives Workshop June 19–24, 2016

ER -

Engineering Academic Software

Abstract

Keywords

Access to Document

Fingerprint

Cite this