Paper detail

Advanced Techniques for Scientific Programming and Collaborative Development of Open Source Software Packages at the International Centre for Theoretical Physics (ICTP)

A large number of computational scientific research projects make use of open source software packages. However, the development process of such tools frequently differs from conventional software development; partly because of the nature of research, where the problems being addressed are not always fully understood; partly because the majority of the development is often carried out by scientists with limited experience and exposure to best practices of software engineering. Often the software development suffers from the pressure to publish scientific results and that credit for software development is limited in comparison. Fundamental components of software engineering like modular and reusable design, validation, documentation, and software integration as well as effective maintenance and user support tend to be disregarded due to lack of resources and qualified specialists. Thus innovative developments are often hindered by steep learning curves required to master development for legacy software packages full of ad hoc solutions. The growing complexity of research, however, requires suitable and maintainable computational tools, resulting in a widening gap between the potential users (often growing in number) and contributors to the development of such a package. In this paper we share our experiences aiming to improve the situation by training particularly young scientists, through disseminating our own experiences at contributing to open source software packages and practicing key components of software engineering adapted for scientists and scientific software development. Specifically we summarize the outcome of the Workshop in Advanced Techniques for Scientific Programming and Collaborative Development of Open Source Software Packages run at the Abdus Salam International Centre for Theoretical Physics in March 2013, and discuss our conclusions for future efforts.

preprint2013arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.