pith. sign in

arxiv: 2504.12646 · v3 · submitted 2025-04-17 · 💻 cs.SE

Research Artifacts in Secondary Studies: A Systematic Mapping in Software Engineering

classification 💻 cs.SE
keywords researchartifactsstudiessecondaryavailabilityengineeringobjectivesoftware
0
0 comments X p. Extension
read the original abstract

Context: Systematic reviews (SRs) summarize state-of-the-art evidence in science, including software engineering (SE). Objective: Our objective is to evaluate how SRs report research artifacts and to provide a comprehensive list of these artifacts. Method: We examined 537 secondary studies published between 2013 and 2023 to analyze the availability and reporting of research artifacts. Results: Our findings indicate that only 31.5% of the reviewed studies include research artifacts. Encouragingly, the situation is gradually improving, as our regression analysis shows a significant increase in the availability of research artifacts over time. However, in 2023, just 62.0% of secondary studies provide a research artifact while an even lower percentage, 30.4% use a permanent repository with a digital object identifier (DOI) for storage. Conclusion: To enhance transparency and reproducibility in SE research, we advocate for the mandatory publication of research artifacts in secondary studies.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet.

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.