Towards Multi-Criteria Prioritization of Best Practices in Research Artifact Sharing

Research artifact sharing is known to strengthen the transparency of scientific studies. However, in the lack of common discipline-specific guidelines for artifacts evaluation, subjective and conflicting expectations may happen and threaten artifact quality. In this paper, we discuss our preliminary ideas for a framework based on quality management principles (5W2H) that can aid in the establishment of common guidelines for artifact evaluation and sharing. Also, using the Analytic Hierarchy Process, we discuss how research communities could join efforts to aid the guidelines’ adequacy to research priorities. These combined methodologies constitute a novelty for software engineering research which can foster research software sustainability.

Diagnostic evaluation with simulated probabilities

As policy makers require more rigorous assessments for the strength of evidence in Theory-Based evaluations, Bayesian logic is attracting increasing interest; however, the estimation of probabilities that this logic (almost) inevitably requires presents challenges. Probabilities can be estimated on the basis of empirical frequencies, but such data are often unavailable for most mechanisms that are objects of evaluation. Subjective probability elicitation techniques are well established in other fields and potentially applicable, but they present potential challenges and might not always be feasible. We introduce the community to a third way: simulated probabilities. We provide proof of concept that simulation can be used to estimate probabilities in diagnostic evaluation and illustrate our case with an application to health policy.