Summary of the First Workshop on Sustainable Software for Science: Practice and Experiences (WSSSPE1)

Challenges related to development, deployment, and maintenance of reusable software for science are becoming a growing concern. Many scientists’ research increasingly depends on the quality and availability of software upon which their works are built. To highlight some of these issues and share experiences, the First Workshop on Sustainable Software for Science: Practice and Experiences (WSSSPE1) was held in November 2013 in conjunction with the SC13 Conference. The workshop featured keynote presentations and a large number (54) of solicited extended abstracts that were grouped into three themes and presented via panels. A set of collaborative notes of the presentations and discussion was taken during the workshop. Unique perspectives were captured about issues such as comprehensive documentation, development and deployment practices, software licenses and career paths for developers. Attribution systems that account for evidence of software contribution and impact were also discussed. These include mechanisms such as Digital Object Identifiers, publication of “software papers”, and the use of online systems, for example source code repositories like GitHub. This paper summarizes the issues and shared experiences that were discussed, including cross-cutting issues and use cases. It joins a nascent literature seeking to understand what drives software work in science, and how it is impacted by the reward systems of science. These incentives can determine the extent to which developers are motivated to build software for the long-term, for the use of others, and whether to work collaboratively or separately. It also explores community building, leadership, and dynamics in relation to successful scientific software

Reproducibility in Research: Systems, Infrastructure, Culture

The reproduction and replication of research results has become a major issue for a number of scientific disciplines. In computer science and related computational disciplines such as systems biology, the challenges closely revolve around the ability to implement (and exploit) novel algorithms and models. Taking a new approach from the literature and applying it to a new codebase frequently requires local knowledge missing from the published manuscripts and transient project websites. Alongside this issue, benchmarking, and the lack of open, transparent and fair benchmark sets present another barrier to the verification and validation of claimed results. In this paper, we outline several recommendations to address these issues, driven by specific examples from a range of scientific domains. Based on these recommendations, we propose a high-level prototype open automated platform for scientific software development which effectively abstracts specific dependencies from the individual researcher and their workstation, allowing easy sharing and reproduction of results. This new e-infrastructure for reproducible computational science offers the potential to incentivise a culture change and drive the adoption of new techniques to improve the quality and efficiency – and thus reproducibility – of scientific exploration.Royal Society UR

Ten simple rules for making training materials FAIR

Author summary: Everything we do today is becoming more and more reliant on the use of computers. The field of biology is no exception; but most biologists receive little or no formal preparation for the increasingly computational aspects of their discipline. In consequence, informal training courses are often needed to plug the gaps; and the demand for such training is growing worldwide. To meet this demand, some training programs are being expanded, and new ones are being developed. Key to both scenarios is the creation of new course materials. Rather than starting from scratch, however, it’s sometimes possible to repurpose materials that already exist. Yet finding suitable materials online can be difficult: They’re often widely scattered across the internet or hidden in their home institutions, with no systematic way to find them. This is a common problem for all digital objects. The scientific community has attempted to address this issue by developing a set of rules (which have been called the Findable, Accessible, Interoperable and Reusable [FAIR] principles) to make such objects more findable and reusable. Here, we show how to apply these rules to help make training materials easier to find, (re)use, and adapt, for the benefit of all

Developing Predictive Molecular Maps of Human Disease through Community-based Modeling

The failure of biology to identify the molecular causes of disease has led to disappointment in the rate of development of new medicines. By combining the power of community-based modeling with broad access to large datasets on a platform that promotes reproducible analyses we can work towards more predictive molecular maps that can deliver better therapeutics

A very simple and fast way to access and validate algorithms in reproducible research

The reproducibility of research in bioinformatics refers to the notion that new methodologies/ algorithms and scientific claims have to be published together with their data and source code, in a way that other researchers may verify the findings to further build more knowledge upon them. The replication and corroboration of research results are key to the scientific process and many journals are discussing the matter nowadays, taking concrete steps in this direction. In this journal itself, a very recent opinion note has appeared highlighting the increasing importance of this topic in bioinformatics and computational biology, inviting the community to further discuss the matter. In agreement with that article, we would like to propose here another step into that direction with a tool that allows the automatic generation of a web interface, named web-demo, directly from source code in a very simple and straightforward way. We believe this contribution can help make research not only reproducible but also more easily accessible. A web-demo associated to a published paper can accelerate an algorithm validation with real data, wide-spreading its use with just a few clicks.Fil: Stegmayer, Georgina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Conicet - Santa Fe. Instituto de Investigación en Señales, Sistemas e Inteligencia Computacional. Universidad Nacional del Litoral. Facultad de Ingeniería y Ciencias Hídricas. Instituto de Investigación en Señales, Sistemas e Inteligencia Computacional; ArgentinaFil: Pividori, Milton Damián. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Conicet - Santa Fe. Instituto de Investigación en Señales, Sistemas e Inteligencia Computacional. Universidad Nacional del Litoral. Facultad de Ingeniería y Ciencias Hídricas. Instituto de Investigación en Señales, Sistemas e Inteligencia Computacional; ArgentinaFil: Milone, Diego Humberto. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Conicet - Santa Fe. Instituto de Investigación en Señales, Sistemas e Inteligencia Computacional. Universidad Nacional del Litoral. Facultad de Ingeniería y Ciencias Hídricas. Instituto de Investigación en Señales, Sistemas e Inteligencia Computacional; Argentin

Report on the Second Workshop on Sustainable Software for Science: Practice and Experiences (WSSSPE2)

This technical report records and discusses the Second Workshop on Sustainable Software for Science: Practice and Experiences (WSSSPE2). The report includes a description of the alternative, experimental submission and review process, two workshop keynote presentations, a series of lightning talks, a discussion on sustainability, and five discussions from the topic areas of exploring sustainability; software development experiences; credit & incentives; reproducibility & reuse & sharing; and code testing & code review. For each topic, the report includes a list of tangible actions that were proposed and that would lead to potential change. The workshop recognized that reliance on scientific software is pervasive in all areas of world-leading research today. The workshop participants then proceeded to explore different perspectives on the concept of sustainability. Key enablers and barriers of sustainable scientific software were identified from their experiences. In addition, recommendations with new requirements such as software credit files and software prize frameworks were outlined for improving practices in sustainable software engineering. There was also broad consensus that formal training in software development or engineering was rare among the practitioners. Significant strides need to be made in building a sense of community via training in software and technical practices, on increasing their size and scope, and on better integrating them directly into graduate education programs. Finally, journals can define and publish policies to improve reproducibility, whereas reviewers can insist that authors provide sufficient information and access to data and software to allow them reproduce the results in the paper. Hence a list of criteria is compiled for journals to provide to reviewers so as to make it easier to review software submitted for publication as a “Software Paper.

Ten simple rules for teaching sustainable software engineering

Computational methods and associated software implementations are central to every field of scientific investigation. Modern biological research, particularly within systems biology, has relied heavily on the development of software tools to process and organize increasingly large datasets, simulate complex mechanistic models, provide tools for the analysis and management of data, and visualize and organize outputs. However, developing high-quality research software requires scientists to develop a host of software development skills, and teaching these skills to students is challenging. There has been a growing importance placed on ensuring reproducibility and good development practices in computational research. However, less attention has been devoted to informing the specific teaching strategies which are effective at nurturing in researchers the complex skillset required to produce high-quality software that, increasingly, is required to underpin both academic and industrial biomedical research. Recent articles in the Ten Simple Rules collection have discussed the teaching of foundational computer science and coding techniques to biology students. We advance this discussion by describing the specific steps for effectively teaching the necessary skills scientists need to develop sustainable software packages which are fit for (re-)use in academic research or more widely. Although our advice is likely to be applicable to all students and researchers hoping to improve their software development skills, our guidelines are directed towards an audience of students that have some programming literacy but little formal training in software development or engineering, typical of early doctoral students. These practices are also applicable outside of doctoral training environments, and we believe they should form a key part of postgraduate training schemes more generally in the life sciences.Comment: Prepared for submission to PLOS Computational Biology's 10 Simple Rules collectio

A how-to guide for code-sharing in biology

Computational biology continues to spread into new fields, becoming more accessible to researchers trained in the wet lab who are eager to take advantage of growing datasets, falling costs, and novel assays that present new opportunities for discovery even outside of the much-discussed developments in artificial intelligence. However, guidance for implementing these techniques is much easier to find than guidance for reporting their use, leaving biologists to guess which details and files are relevant. Here, we provide a set of recommendations for sharing code, with an eye toward guiding those who are comparatively new to applying open science principles to their computational work. Additionally, we review existing literature on the topic, summarize the most common tips, and evaluate the code-sharing policies of the most influential journals in biology, which occasionally encourage code-sharing but seldom require it. Taken together, we provide a user manual for biologists who seek to follow code-sharing best practices but are unsure where to start.Comment: 19 pages, 1 figure; for supporting data see https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.1045994

To share or not to share: Publication and quality assurance of research data outputs. A report commissioned by the Research Information Network

A study on current practices with respect to data creation, use, sharing and publication in eight research disciplines (systems biology, genomics, astronomy, chemical crystallography, rural economy and land use, classics, climate science and social and public health science). The study looked at data creation and care, motivations for sharing data, discovery, access and usability of datasets and quality assurance of data in each discipline