@proceedings {1916,
	title = {Advancing Open Science with Version Control and Blockchains},
	year = {2017},
	month = {05/2017},
	pages = {13-14},
	abstract = {The scientific community is facing a crisis of reproducibility:
confidence in scientific results is damaged by
concerns regarding the integrity of experimental data and the
analyses applied to that data. Experimental integrity can be
compromised inadvertently when researchers overlook some
important component of their experimental procedure, or intentionally
by researchers or malicious third-parties who are
biased towards ensuring a specific outcome of an experiment.
The scientific community has pushed for {\textquotedblleft}open science{\textquotedblright} to add
transparency to the experimental process, asking researchers to
publicly register their data sets and experimental procedures.
We argue that the software engineering community can leverage
its expertise in tracking traceability and provenance of source
code and its related artifacts to simplify data management for
scientists. Moreover, by leveraging smart contract and blockchain
technologies, we believe that it is possible for such a system to
guarantee end-to-end integrity of scientific data and results while
supporting collaborative research.},
	keywords = {blockchain, replication, reproducible},
	author = {Jonathan Bell and Thomas D. LaToza and Foteini Baldmitsi and Angelos Stavrou}
}
@proceedings {1561,
	title = {A Replicable Infrastructure for Empirical Studies of Email Archives},
	year = {2013},
	month = {10/2013},
	pages = {43-50},
	publisher = {IEEE},
	address = {Baltimore, MD, USA},
	abstract = {This paper describes a replicable infrastructure solution for conducting empirical software engineering studies based on email mailing list archives. Mailing list emails, such as those affiliated with free, libre, and open source software (FLOSS) projects, are currently archived in several places online, but each research team that wishes to study these email artifacts closely must design their own solution for collection, storage and cleaning of the data. Consequently, research results will be difficult to replicate, especially as the email archive for any living project will still be continually growing. This paper describes a simple, replicable infrastructure for the collection, storage, and cleaning of project email data and analyses.},
	keywords = {apache, cleaning, collection, couchdb, database, document-oriented database, email, lucene, mailing lists, nosql, replication, storage},
	isbn = {978-0-7695-5121-0},
	attachments = {https://flosshub.org/sites/flosshub.org/files/RESERv2.pdf},
	author = {Squire, Megan}
}
@conference {948,
	title = {Beyond replication: An example of the potential benefits of replicability in the mining of software repositories community},
	booktitle = {1st Workshop on Replication in Empirical Software Engineering Research},
	year = {2010},
	month = {05/2010},
	keywords = {literature review, msr, replication},
	author = {Gregorio Robles and Daniel M. German}
}
@conference {947,
	title = {Replicating MSR: A study of the potential replicability of papers published in the Mining Software Repositories proceedings},
	booktitle = {2010 7th IEEE Working Conference on Mining Software Repositories (MSR 2010)2010 7th IEEE Working Conference on Mining Software Repositories (MSR 2010)},
	year = {2010},
	pages = {171 - 180},
	publisher = {IEEE},
	organization = {IEEE},
	address = {Cape Town, South Africa},
	abstract = {This paper is the result of reviewing all papers published in the proceedings of the former International Workshop on Mining Software Repositories (MSR) (2004-2006) and now Working Conference on MSR (2007-2009). We have analyzed the papers that contained any experimental analysis of software projects for their potentiality of being replicated. In this regard, three main issues have been addressed: i) the public availability of the data used as case study, ii) the public availability of the processed dataset used by researchers and iii) the public availability of the tools and scripts. A total number of 171 papers have been analyzed from the six workshops/working conferences up to date. Results show that MSR authors use in general publicly available data sources, mainly from free software repositories, but that the amount of publicly available processed datasets is very low. Regarding tools and scripts, for a majority of papers we have not been able to find any tool, even for papers where the authors explicitly state that they have built one. Lessons learned from the experience of reviewing the whole MSR literature and some potential solutions to lower the barriers of replicability are finally presented and discussed.},
	keywords = {data, literature review, msr, replication},
	isbn = {978-1-4244-6802-7},
	doi = {10.1109/MSR.2010.5463348},
	url = {http://gsyc.urjc.es/~grex/msr2010},
	attachments = {https://flosshub.org/sites/flosshub.org/files/171MSR_2010_69.final_.pdf},
	author = {Gregorio Robles}
}
