"We do not appreciate being experimented on": Developer and Researcher Views on the Ethics of Experiments on Open-Source Projects

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2112.13217v2
• Date: Fri, 2 Jun 2023 13:20:41 GMT
• Title: "We do not appreciate being experimented on": Developer and Researcher Views on the Ethics of Experiments on Open-Source Projects
• Authors: Dror G. Feitelson
• Abstract summary: We conduct a survey among open source developers and empirical software engineering researchers to see what behaviors they think are acceptable. Results indicate that open-source developers are largely open to research, provided it is done transparently. It is recommended that open source repositories and projects address use for research in their access guidelines.
• Score: 0.0
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
• Abstract: A tenet of open source software development is to accept contributions from users-developers (typically after appropriate vetting). But should this also include interventions done as part of research on open source development? Following an incident in which buggy code was submitted to the Linux kernel to see whether it would be caught, we conduct a survey among open source developers and empirical software engineering researchers to see what behaviors they think are acceptable. This covers two main issues: the use of publicly accessible information, and conducting active experimentation. The survey had 224 respondents. The results indicate that open-source developers are largely open to research, provided it is done transparently. In other words, many would agree to experiments on open-source projects if the subjects were notified and provided informed consent, and in special cases also if only the project leaders agree. While researchers generally hold similar opinions, they sometimes fail to appreciate certain nuances that are important to developers. Examples include observing license restrictions on publishing open-source code and safeguarding the code. Conversely, researchers seem to be more concerned than developers about privacy issues. Based on these results, it is recommended that open source repositories and projects address use for research in their access guidelines, and that researchers take care to ask permission also when not formally required to do so. We note too that the open source community wants to be heard, so professional societies and IRBs should consult with them when formulating ethics codes.

Related papers

• The New Dynamics of Open Source: Relicensing, Forks, & Community Impact [0.0]
  Vendors are relicensing popular open source projects to more restrictive licenses in the hopes of generating more revenue. This research compares organizational affiliation data from three case studies based on license changes that resulted in forks. Research indicates that the forks resulting from these relicensing events have more organizational diversity than the original projects.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-11-07T14:21:45Z)
• Understanding Code Understandability Improvements in Code Reviews [79.16476505761582]
  We analyzed 2,401 code review comments from Java open-source projects on GitHub. 83.9% of suggestions for improvement were accepted and integrated, with fewer than 1% later reverted.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-29T12:21:23Z)
• On the modification and revocation of open source licences [0.14843690728081999]
  This paper argues for the creation of a subset of rights that allows open source contributors to force users to update to the most recent version of a model. Legal, reputational and moral risks related to open-sourcing AI models could justify contributors having more control over downstream uses.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-29T00:00:25Z)
• What Can Natural Language Processing Do for Peer Review? [173.8912784451817]
  In modern science, peer review is widely used, yet it is hard, time-consuming, and prone to error. Since the artifacts involved in peer review are largely text-based, Natural Language Processing has great potential to improve reviewing. We detail each step of the process from manuscript submission to camera-ready revision, and discuss the associated challenges and opportunities for NLP assistance.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-10T16:06:43Z)
• On the Consideration of AI Openness: Can Good Intent Be Abused? [11.117214240906678]
  We build a dataset consisting of 200 examples of questions and corresponding answers about criminal activities based on 200 Korean precedents. We find that a widely accepted open-source LLM can be easily tuned with EVE to provide unethical and informative answers about criminal activities. This implies that although open-source technologies contribute to scientific progress, some care must be taken to mitigate possible malicious use cases.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-03-11T09:24:06Z)
• How is Software Reuse Discussed in Stack Overflow? [12.586676749644342]
  We present an empirical study of 1,409 posts to better understand the challenges developers face when reusing code. Our findings show that 'visual studio' is the top occurring bigrams for question posts, and there are frequent design patterns utilized by developers for the purpose of reuse.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-01T03:13:36Z)
• How do Software Engineering Researchers Use GitHub? An Empirical Study of Artifacts & Impact [0.2209921757303168]
  We ask whether and how authors engage in social coding related to their research. Ten thousand papers in top SE research venues, hand-annotating their GitHub links, and studying 309 paper-related repositories. We find a wide distribution in popularity and impact, some strongly correlated with publication venue.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-02T18:56:33Z)
• Rethinking People Analytics With Inverse Transparency by Design [57.67333075002697]
  We propose a new design approach for workforce analytics we refer to as inverse transparency by design. We find that architectural changes are made without inhibiting core functionality. We conclude that inverse transparency by design is a promising approach to realize accepted and responsible people analytics.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-16T21:37:35Z)
• Repro: An Open-Source Library for Improving the Reproducibility and Usability of Publicly Available Research Code [74.28810048824519]
  Repro is an open-source library which aims at improving the usability of research code. It provides a lightweight Python API for running software released by researchers within Docker containers.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-04-29T01:54:54Z)
• Yes-Yes-Yes: Donation-based Peer Reviewing Data Collection for ACL Rolling Review and Beyond [58.71736531356398]
  We present an in-depth discussion of peer reviewing data, outline the ethical and legal desiderata for peer reviewing data collection, and propose the first continuous, donation-based data collection workflow. We report on the ongoing implementation of this workflow at the ACL Rolling Review and deliver the first insights obtained with the newly collected data.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-01-27T11:02:43Z)
• Differentiable Open-Ended Commonsense Reasoning [80.94997942571838]
  We study open-ended commonsense reasoning (OpenCSR) using as a resource only a corpus of commonsense facts written in natural language. As an approach to OpenCSR, we propose DrFact, an efficient Differentiable model for multi-hop Reasoning over knowledge Facts.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-10-24T10:07:00Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.