Institute of Engineering and Computational Mechanics, University of Stuttgart, 70569, Stuttgart, Germany.
Cluster of Excellence SimTech, University of Stuttgart, 70569, Stuttgart, Germany.
Sci Rep. 2022 Apr 21;12(1):6567. doi: 10.1038/s41598-022-10376-9.
The reuse of research software needs good documentation, however, the documentation in particular is often criticized. Especially in non-IT specific disciplines, the lack of documentation is attributed to the lack of training, the lack of time or missing rewards. This article addresses the hypothesis that scientists do document but do not know exactly what they need to document, why, and for whom. In order to evaluate the actual documentation practice of research software, we examined existing recommendations, and we evaluated their implementation in everyday practice using a concrete example from the engineering sciences and compared the findings with best practice examples. To get a broad overview of what documentation of research software entailed, we defined categories and used them to conduct the research. Our results show that the big picture of what documentation of research software means is missing. Recommendations do not consider the important role of researchers, who write research software, whose documentation takes mainly place in their research articles. Moreover, we show that research software always has a history that influences the documentation.
研究软件的复用需要良好的文档,但文档往往受到批评。特别是在非 IT 特定学科中,缺乏文档通常归因于缺乏培训、缺乏时间或缺少奖励。本文假设科学家确实会记录文档,但他们不清楚需要记录什么、为什么记录以及为谁记录。为了评估研究软件的实际文档编制实践,我们检查了现有的建议,并使用工程科学中的一个具体示例来评估它们在日常实践中的实施情况,并将研究结果与最佳实践示例进行比较。为了全面了解研究软件文档编制的内容,我们定义了类别并使用它们来进行研究。研究结果表明,研究软件文档编制的全貌缺失。这些建议没有考虑到研究人员的重要作用,他们编写研究软件,他们的文档主要记录在他们的研究文章中。此外,我们还表明,研究软件总是有一个影响文档的历史。