Mercurial > hg > soundsoftware-icassp-2012
view survey_appendix.tex @ 13:bba6c067444c
removed the survey appendix from the paper.
author | luisf <luis.figueira@eecs.qmul.ac.uk> |
---|---|
date | Thu, 22 Sep 2011 16:24:37 +0100 |
parents | 84ad0fe93204 |
children |
line wrap: on
line source
\subsection{Software Development} Our survey shows that 66,6\% of researchers use more than one OS. Linux isn’t used as a single operating system by anybody, which seems to indicate that most Linux users use it for multi-platform developing or for specific software needs. SuperCollider, Android SDK/NDK, NET, PRAAT (Speech Researcher), CUDA-C (GPU Programming), Clojure, Presentation, R. Most researchers (56\%) use version control. This kind of system is more widely used by PHD students and Postdocs/Research Assistants. When asked for what kind of technologies were used, SVN (14) and GIT (7) were the most popular systems. CVS (5) and Mercurial (4) were the other available options. Many users use more than one of these systems simultaneously. When asked for the usage of code hosting services, 52\% of the researchers said their code stayed in their computers. The most used third-party source code hosting services is SourceForge (6 users). 10 users are using university source code version control tools. \textit{remove numbers, only leave percentages} 27 users do not produce or maintain software. 16 do, while 11 did not answer. \textit{percentages\ldots} Most users (57\%) do not plan to make any software available. When asked “Do you develop any software that you do not intend to publish?”, 52\% of the users answered no. Possible commercial use is the main justification given for not publishing the software at this point. \subsection{Reproducible Research} Most researchers (56\%) acknowledge they don't take the necessary steps to ensure sustainable and reproducible research. Many do not understand the concept of reproducible research. By analyzing this accordingly to the current position, we can see that PhD students are the ones that are less aware of the importance of reproducible research (even the ones that are almost finishing their PhD). Many of the researchers that ensure they do the steps necessary to reproducibility say they only give the code and/or data to interested researchers. Some researchers also say that they publish their code in their own pages. At the same time, there are indications that this procedure can lead to unsustainability itself. Many researchers complain about the amount of time and/or complexity of making research reproducible. Also many of them make only parts of their work available. Some researchers also complain about copyright issues in releasing data. Many researchers do not understand the full concept of reproducibility. Some assume that explaining the algorithm and the tools used is enough for other researchers to be able to reproduce their results. Finally, some typical (but not widely admitted) answers justify the decision not to embrace reproducibility due to messy code or code/data protection: %%% Local Variables: %%% mode: latex %%% TeX-master: "cannam" %%% End: