{"title":"主题演讲2:对再现性圣杯的思考","authors":"R. Kazman","doi":"10.1109/ECASE.2017.18","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Disciplines as diverse as psychology, physics, marketing, and medicine have, for the past few years, been going through a soul-searching over the “reproducibility crisis”. According to a recent survey in Nature, over 70% of researchers have failed in reproducing another scientist’s results and more than half have failed in trying to reproduce their own results. But replication of scientific results is the heart of the scientific method; without this cornerstone we do not have science, we have faith and mysticism. Note, however, that reproducibility comes at a steep cost: more rigor, more scrutiny, and tightened controls on what is considered a publishable result will doubtless burden scientists and slow the pace of innovation. In this talk I will discuss the roots of replication problems-replication bias, null aversion, and incentive structures for researchers-and their implications on reproducibility for the field of software engineering. Finally, I will present a few ideas on how we can think about improving the state of our discipline.","PeriodicalId":376859,"journal":{"name":"2017 IEEE/ACM 1st International Workshop on Establishing the Community-Wide Infrastructure for Architecture-Based Software Engineering (ECASE)","volume":"14 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Keynote 2: Musings on the Holy Grail of Reproducibility\",\"authors\":\"R. Kazman\",\"doi\":\"10.1109/ECASE.2017.18\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Disciplines as diverse as psychology, physics, marketing, and medicine have, for the past few years, been going through a soul-searching over the “reproducibility crisis”. According to a recent survey in Nature, over 70% of researchers have failed in reproducing another scientist’s results and more than half have failed in trying to reproduce their own results. But replication of scientific results is the heart of the scientific method; without this cornerstone we do not have science, we have faith and mysticism. Note, however, that reproducibility comes at a steep cost: more rigor, more scrutiny, and tightened controls on what is considered a publishable result will doubtless burden scientists and slow the pace of innovation. In this talk I will discuss the roots of replication problems-replication bias, null aversion, and incentive structures for researchers-and their implications on reproducibility for the field of software engineering. Finally, I will present a few ideas on how we can think about improving the state of our discipline.\",\"PeriodicalId\":376859,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"2017 IEEE/ACM 1st International Workshop on Establishing the Community-Wide Infrastructure for Architecture-Based Software Engineering (ECASE)\",\"volume\":\"14 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2017-05-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"2017 IEEE/ACM 1st International Workshop on Establishing the Community-Wide Infrastructure for Architecture-Based Software Engineering (ECASE)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1109/ECASE.2017.18\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"2017 IEEE/ACM 1st International Workshop on Establishing the Community-Wide Infrastructure for Architecture-Based Software Engineering (ECASE)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1109/ECASE.2017.18","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在过去的几年里,心理学、物理学、市场营销和医学等不同学科一直在对“可重复性危机”进行反思。根据《自然》杂志最近的一项调查,超过70%的研究人员在复制另一位科学家的结果时失败了,超过一半的研究人员在试图复制自己的结果时失败了。但是科学结果的复制是科学方法的核心;没有这个基石,我们就没有科学,就没有信仰和神秘主义。然而,需要注意的是,可重复性需要付出高昂的代价:对可发表的结果进行更严格、更严格的审查和更严格的控制,无疑会给科学家带来负担,并减缓创新的步伐。在这次演讲中,我将讨论复制问题的根源——复制偏差、零厌恶和研究人员的激励结构——以及它们对软件工程领域的可重复性的影响。最后,我将提出一些关于如何改善我们学科状况的想法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Keynote 2: Musings on the Holy Grail of Reproducibility
Disciplines as diverse as psychology, physics, marketing, and medicine have, for the past few years, been going through a soul-searching over the “reproducibility crisis”. According to a recent survey in Nature, over 70% of researchers have failed in reproducing another scientist’s results and more than half have failed in trying to reproduce their own results. But replication of scientific results is the heart of the scientific method; without this cornerstone we do not have science, we have faith and mysticism. Note, however, that reproducibility comes at a steep cost: more rigor, more scrutiny, and tightened controls on what is considered a publishable result will doubtless burden scientists and slow the pace of innovation. In this talk I will discuss the roots of replication problems-replication bias, null aversion, and incentive structures for researchers-and their implications on reproducibility for the field of software engineering. Finally, I will present a few ideas on how we can think about improving the state of our discipline.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Benchmark Requirements for Microservices Architecture Research Ripple: A Test-Aware Architecture Modeling Framework Copper: Bringing Flexible Components to the .NET Framework Towards a Platform for Empirical Software Design Studies Towards Ontology-Based Software Architecture Representations
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1