搜索结果：Industrial & engineering chemistry research

Political and ideological pressures shape global research. Recently, these pressures have become particularly visible in research related to diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI). Drastic changes in national funding and governmental guidance, especially in the US, have affected the global software engineering research ecosystem. The impacts of these pressures on research are not always direct, as they operate at multiple levels. However, what is clear is that these pressures affect every field, including software engineering (SE), despite the belief that our field is politically and ideologically neutral. In this position paper, we examine cases of political and ideological pressures on the SE research ecosystem. We investigate the community's perceptions of political and ideological pressures by analyzing community survey responses and outlining case examples of DEI backlash in SE research across three levels: macro, meso, and micro. Our research shows how recent political and ideological pressures have affected SE research across these levels, and, as a result, we propose actionable steps for the community to address these issues at different levels.

The heterogeneity in the organization of software engineering (SE) research historically exists, i.e., funded research model and hands-on model, which makes software engineering become a thriving interdisciplinary field in the last 50 years. However, the funded research model is becoming dominant in SE research recently, indicating such heterogeneity has been seriously and systematically threatened. In this essay, we first explain why the heterogeneity is needed in the organization of SE research, then present the current trend of SE research nowadays, as well as the consequences and potential futures. The choice is at our hands, and we urge our community to seriously consider maintaining the heterogeneity in the organization of software engineering research.

The software engineering researchers from countries with smaller economies, particularly non-English speaking ones, represent valuable minorities within the software engineering community. As researchers from Poland, we represent such a country. We analyzed the ICSE FOSE (Future of Software Engineering) community survey through reflexive thematic analysis to show our viewpoint on key software community issues. We believe that the main problem is the growing research-industry gap, which particularly impacts smaller communities and small local companies. Based on this analysis and our experiences, we present a set of recommendations for improvements that would enhance software engineering research and industrial collaborations in smaller economies.

Modern science is relying on software more than ever. The behavior and outcomes of this software shape the scientific and public discourse on important topics like climate change, economic growth, or the spread of infections. Most researchers creating software for scientific purposes are not trained in Software Engineering. As a consequence, research software is often developed ad hoc without following stringent processes. With this paper, we want to characterize research software as a new application domain that needs attention from the Requirements Engineering community. We conducted an exploratory study based on 8 interviews with 12 researchers who develop software. We describe how researchers elicit, document, and analyze requirements for research software and what processes they follow. From this, we derive specific challenges and describe a vision of Requirements Engineering for research software.

Research in software engineering is essential for improving development practices, leading to reliable and secure software. Leveraging the principles of quantum physics, quantum computing has emerged as a new computational paradigm that offers significant advantages over classical computing. As quantum computing progresses rapidly, its potential applications across various fields are becoming apparent. In software engineering, many tasks involve complex computations where quantum computers can greatly speed up the development process, leading to faster and more efficient solutions. With the growing use of quantum-based applications in different fields, quantum software engineering (QSE) has emerged as a discipline focused on designing, developing, and optimizing quantum software for diverse applications. This paper aims to review the role of quantum computing in software engineering research and the latest developments in QSE. To our knowledge, this is the first comprehensive review on this topic. We begin by introducing quantum computing, exploring its fundamental concepts, and discussing its potential applications in software engineering. We also examine various QSE techniques th

Background: Assessing and communicating software engineering research can be challenging. Design science is recognized as an appropriate research paradigm for applied research but is seldom referred to in software engineering. Applying the design science lens to software engineering research may improve the assessment and communication of research contributions. Aim: The aim of this study is 1) to understand whether the design science lens helps summarize and assess software engineering research contributions, and 2) to characterize different types of design science contributions in the software engineering literature. Method: In previous research, we developed a visual abstract template, summarizing the core constructs of the design science paradigm. In this study, we use this template in a review of a set of 38 top software engineering publications to extract and analyze their design science contributions. Results: We identified five clusters of papers, classifying them according to their alignment with the design science paradigm. Conclusions: The design science lens helps emphasize the theoretical contribution of research output---in terms of technological rules---and reflect o

LinkedIn is the largest professional network in the world. As such, it can serve to build bridges between practitioners, whose daily work is software engineering (SE), and researchers, who work to advance the field of software engineering. We know that such a metaphorical bridge exists: SE research findings are sometimes shared on LinkedIn and commented on by software practitioners. Yet, we do not know what state the bridge is in. Therefore, we quantitatively and qualitatively investigate how SE practitioners and researchers approach each other via public LinkedIn discussions and what both sides can contribute to effective science communication. We found that a considerable proportion of LinkedIn posts on SE research are written by people who are not the paper authors (39%). Further, 71% of all comments in our dataset are from people in the industry, but only every second post receives at least one comment at all. Based on our findings, we formulate concrete advice for researchers and practitioners to make sharing new research findings on LinkedIn more fruitful.

In the evolving landscape of scientific and scholarly research, effective collaboration between Research Software Engineers (RSEs) and Software Engineering Researchers (SERs) is pivotal for advancing innovation and ensuring the integrity of computational methodologies. This paper presents ten strategic guidelines aimed at fostering productive partnerships between these two distinct yet complementary communities. The guidelines emphasize the importance of recognizing and respecting the cultural and operational differences between RSEs and SERs, proactively initiating and nurturing collaborations, and engaging within each other's professional environments. They advocate for identifying shared challenges, maintaining openness to emerging problems, ensuring mutual benefits, and serving as advocates for one another. Additionally, the guidelines highlight the necessity of vigilance in monitoring collaboration dynamics, securing institutional support, and defining clear, shared objectives. By adhering to these principles, RSEs and SERs can build synergistic relationships that enhance the quality and impact of research outcomes.

Over twenty years ago, the Software Engineering (SE) research community have been involved with Evidence-Based Software Engineering (EBSE). EBSE aims to inform industrial practice with the best evidence from rigorous research, preferably from systematic literature reviews (SLRs). Since then, SE researchers have conducted many SLRs, perfected their SLR procedures, proposed alternative ways of presenting their results (such as Evidence Briefings), and profusely discussed how to conduct research that impacts practice. Nevertheless, there is still a feeling that SLRs' results are not reaching practitioners. Something is missing. In this vision paper, we introduce Evidence to Decision (EtD) frameworks from the health sciences, which propose gathering experts in panels to assess the existing best evidence about the impact of an intervention in all relevant outcomes and make structured recommendations based on them. The insight we can leverage from EtD frameworks is not their structure per se but all the relevant criteria for making recommendations to practitioners from SLRs. Furthermore, we provide a worked example based on an SE SLR. We also discuss the challenges the SE research and pr

Anecdotal evidence suggests that Research Software Engineers (RSEs) and Software Engineering Researchers (SERs) often use different terminologies for similar concepts, creating communication challenges. To better understand these divergences, we have started investigating how SE fundamentals from the SER community are interpreted within the RSE community, identifying aligned concepts, knowledge gaps, and areas for potential adaptation. Our preliminary findings reveal opportunities for mutual learning and collaboration, and our systematic methodology for terminology mapping provides a foundation for a crowd-sourced extension and validation in the future.

Background: The need for empirical investigations in software engineering is growing. Many researchers nowadays, conduct and validate their solutions using empirical research. Survey is one empirical method which enables researchers to collect data from a large population. Main aim of the survey is to generalize the findings. Aims: In this study we aim to identify the problems researchers face during survey design, and mitigation strategies. Method: A literature review as well as semi-structured interviews with nine software engineering researchers were conducted to elicit their views on problems and mitigation strategies. The researchers are all focused on empirical software engineering. Results: We identified 24 problems and 65 strategies, structured according to the survey research process. The most commonly discussed problem was sampling, in particular the ability to obtain a sufficiently large sample. To improve survey instrument design, evaluation and execution recommendations for question formulation and survey pre-testing were given. The importance of involving multiple researchers in the analysis of survey results was stressed. Conclusions: The elicited problems and strate

Large Language Models (LLMs) have shown great potential in solving complex problems in various fields, including oil and gas engineering and other industrial engineering disciplines like factory automation, PLC programming etc. However, automatic identification of strong and weak solutions to fundamental physics equations governing several industrial processes remain a challenging task. This paper identifies the limitation of current LLM approaches, particularly ChatGPT in selected practical problems native to oil and gas engineering but not exclusively. The performance of ChatGPT in solving complex problems in oil and gas engineering is discussed and the areas where LLMs are most effective are presented.

Software engineering conferences bring together thousands of academicians and software practitioners so that academic research and professional practices can influence each other. In essence, a symbiotic relationship exists between the research community and the software industry, which must be maintained, nurtured and re-examined periodically. Given the major AI breakthroughs (e.g., LLMs) and large-scale adoption of AI by the software industry, a re-examination of the relationship between academia and the SE industry is highly warranted. In this position paper, we argue that the software engineering community is deeply concerned about its research impact and relevance to industry practices. By conducting an empirical study using the survey responses from the SE community, we not only provide compelling evidence supporting our position but also propose new calls for action and reforms in SE, and thus envision a new future for the software engineering community.

Context: Research collaborations between software engineering industry and academia can provide significant benefits to both sides, including improved innovation capacity for industry, and real-world environment for motivating and validating research ideas. However, building scalable and effective research collaborations in software engineering is known to be challenging. While such challenges can be varied and many, in this paper we focus on the challenges of achieving participative knowledge creation supported by active dialog between industry and academia and continuous commitment to joint problem solving. Objective: This paper aims to understand what are the elements of a successful industry-academia collaboration that enable the culture of participative knowledge creation. Method: We conducted participant observation collecting qualitative data spanning 8 years of collaborative research between a software engineering research group on software V&V and the Norwegian IT sector. The collected data was analyzed and synthesized into a practical collaboration model, named the Certus Model. Results: The model is structured in seven phases, describing activities from setting up re

The Princeton Research Software Engineering Group has grown rapidly since its inception in late 2016. The group, housed in the central Research Computing Department, comprised of professional Research Software Engineers (RSEs), works directly with researchers to create high quality research software to enable new scientific advances. As the group has matured so has the need for formalizing operational details and procedures. The RSE group uses an RSE partnership model, where Research Software Engineers work long-term with a designated academic department, institute, center, consortium, or individual principal investigator (PI). This article describes the operation of the central Princeton RSE group including funding, partner & project selection, and best practices for defining expectations for a successful partnership with researchers.

In light of the 40th jubilee of Requirements Engineering (RE), roughly 40 experts met in Switzerland to discuss where our discipline stands today. As of today, the common view is, indisputably, that RE as a discipline is stable and respected, as pointed out by Sarah Gregory when covering the seminar in her column to which articles like this one are invited to present ongoing research. However, it is also evident that after 40 years of promising research, conducting research that industry needs is still an ongoing challenge. Research that industry needs means research that solves industrial problems practitioners face; but do we really understand those problems? Here, I want to recapitulate on this research challenge and outline an initiative, the Naming the Pain in Requirements Engineering Initiative, that aims at tackling this problem.

There is an increasing interest in research on the combination of AI techniques and methods with MDE. However, there is a gap between AI and MDE practices, as well as between researchers and practitioners. This paper tackles this gap by reporting on industrial requirements in this field. In the AIDOaRt research project, practitioners and researchers collaborate on AI-augmented automation supporting modeling, coding, testing, monitoring, and continuous development in cyber-physical systems. The project specifically lies at the intersection of industry and academia collaboration with several industrial use cases. Through a process of elicitation and refinement, 78 high-level requirements were defined, and generalized into 30 generic requirements by the AIDOaRt partners. The main contribution of this paper is the set of generic requirements from the project for enhancing the development of cyber-physical systems with artificial intelligence, DevOps, and model-driven engineering, identifying the hot spots of industry needs in the interactions of MDE and AI. Future work will refine, implement and evaluate solutions toward these requirements in industry contexts.

As Engineering Education Research (EER) develops as a discipline it is necessary for EER scholars to contribute to the development of learning theory rather than simply being informed by it. It has been suggested that to do this effectively will require partnerships between Engineering scholars and psychologists, education researchers, including other social scientists. The formation of such partnerships is particularly important when considering the introduction of business-related skills into engineering curriculum designed to prepare 21st Century Engineering Students for workplace challenges. In order to encourage scholars beyond Engineering to engage with EER, it is necessary to provide an introduction to the complexities of EER. With this aim in mind, this paper provides an outline review of what is considered rigorous research from an EER perspective as well as highlighting some of the core methodological traditions of EER. The paper aims to facilitate further discussion between EER scholars and researchers from other disciplines, ultimately leading to future collaboration on innovative and rigorous EER.

In recent years, many software engineering researchers have begun to include artifacts alongside their research papers. Ideally, artifacts, including tools, benchmarks, and data, support the dissemination of ideas, provide evidence for research claims, and serve as a starting point for future research. However, in practice, artifacts suffer from a variety of issues that prevent the realization of their full potential. To help the software engineering community realize the full potential of artifacts, we seek to understand the challenges involved in the creation, sharing, and use of artifacts. To that end, we perform a mixed-methods study including a survey of artifacts in software engineering publications, and an online survey of 153 software engineering researchers. By analyzing the perspectives of artifact creators, users, and reviewers, we identify several high-level challenges that affect the quality of artifacts including mismatched expectations between these groups, and a lack of sufficient reward for both creators and reviewers. Using Diffusion of Innovations as an analytical framework, we examine how these challenges relate to one another, and build an understanding of the