Paper detail

Software Use in Astronomy: an Informal Survey

We report on an informal survey about the use of software in the worldwide astronomical community. The survey was carried out between December 2014 and February 2015, collecting responses from 1142 astronomers, spanning all career levels. We find that all participants use software in their research. The vast majority of participants, 90%, write at least some of their own software. Even though writing software is so wide-spread among the survey participants, only 8% of them report that they have received substantial training in software development. Another 49% of the participants have received "little" training. The remaining 43% have received no training. We also find that astronomers' software stack is fairly narrow. The 10 most popular tools among astronomers are (from most to least popular): Python, shell scripting, IDL, C/C++, Fortran, IRAF, spreadsheets, HTML/CSS, SQL and Supermongo. Across all participants the most common programing language is Python ($67\pm 2\%$), followed by IDL ($44\pm 2\%$), C/C++ ($37\pm 2\%$) and Fortran ($28\pm 2\%$). IRAF is used frequently by $24\pm 1\%$ of participants. We show that all trends are largely independent of career stage, area of research and geographic location.

preprint2015arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access2 authors2 topics

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 map preview

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.