Research software is increasingly recognized as a vital component of the scholarly record. Journals offer authors the opportunity to publish research software papers, but often have different requirements for how these publications should be structured and how code should be verified. In this short case study we gather data from 20 Physical Science journals to trace the frequency, quality control, and publishing criteria for software papers. Our goal with the case study is to provide a proof-of-concept for doing descriptive empirical work with software publication policies across numerous domains of science and engineering. In the narrative we therefore provide descriptive statistics showing how these journals differ in criteria required for archiving, linking, verifying, and documenting software as part of a formal publication. The contribution of this preliminary work is twofold: 1. We provide case study of Physical Science research software publications over time; 2. We demonstrate the use of a new survey method for analyzing research software publication policies. In our conclusion, we describe how comparative research into software publication policies can provide better criteria and requirements for an emerging software publication landscape.
翻译:这份简短的案例研究中,我们收集了20个物理科学期刊的数据,以追踪软件论文的频率、质量控制和出版标准。我们与案例研究的目标是为在科学和工程的众多领域开展软件出版政策方面的描述性经验工作提供一个概念证明。因此,在叙述中,我们提供了描述性统计数据,说明这些期刊在归档、链接、核实和记录软件作为正式出版物的一部分所需的标准方面有何不同。这一初步工作的贡献有两个方面:1. 我们提供了关于物理科学研究软件出版物的案例研究;2. 我们展示了使用新的调查方法分析研究软件出版政策的情况。我们的结论是,对软件出版政策进行比较研究,可以为新出现的软件出版格局提供更好的标准和要求。