Article

SAS2013 Artifact Submission Experience Report

Authors:
To read the full-text of this research, you can request a copy directly from the authors.

Abstract

SAS2013 Artifact Submission Experience Report is presented by experts. The submitted artifacts would be used by the program committee as a secondary evaluation criteria whose sole purpose is to find additional positive arguments for the paper's acceptance. The motivation to submit artifacts as complete VMs was to provide flexibility to the authors in terms of operating system, along with ensuring that reviewers and future users of the archive would be able to examine the artifacts without hardware/OS dependencies. The authors seemed positive about the submission process and made the extra effort of submitting VM images, with instructions on how to use them. The existence of artifacts gave more confidence about the experimental results of a submission, enabled the reviewers to answer some questions about the papers, and in the case of papers leaning towards rejection provided another mechanism to save the paper.

No full-text available

Request Full-text Paper PDF

To read the full-text of this research,
you can request a copy directly from the authors.

ResearchGate has not been able to resolve any citations for this publication.
Article
Software and other digital artifacts are amongst the most valuable contributions of computer science. Yet our conferences treat these mostly as second-class artifacts---especially conferences in the software sciences, which ought to know better. This article argues for elevating these other artifacts by making them part of the evaluation process for papers, and reports on experience from an iteration of an Artifact Evaluation Committee for ESEC/FSE 2011.