Peer Code Review in Research Software Development: The Research Software Engineer Perspective

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2511.10781v1
• Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2025 20:07:10 GMT
• Title: Peer Code Review in Research Software Development: The Research Software Engineer Perspective
• Authors: Md Ariful Islam Malik, Jeffrey C. Carver, Nasir U. Eisty,
• Abstract summary: While peer code review can improve software quality, its adoption by research software engineers (RSEs) remains unexplored.<n>This study explores RSE perspectives on peer code review, focusing on their practices, challenges, and potential improvements.
• Score: 0.6385006149689549
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Background: Research software is crucial for enabling research discoveries and supporting data analysis, simulation, and interpretation across domains. However, evolving requirements, complex inputs, and legacy dependencies hinder the software quality and maintainability. While peer code review can improve software quality, its adoption by research software engineers (RSEs) remains unexplored. Aims: This study explores RSE perspectives on peer code review, focusing on their practices, challenges, and potential improvements. Building on prior work, it aims to uncover how RSEs insights differ from those of other research software developers and identify factors that can enhance code review adoption in this domain. Method: We surveyed RSEs to gather insights into their perspectives on peer code review. The survey design aligned with previous research to enable comparative analysis while including additional questions tailored to RSEs. Results: We received 61 valid responses from the survey. The findings align with prior research while uncovering unique insights about the challenges and practices of RSEs compared to broader developer groups. Conclusions: Peer code review is vital in improving research software's quality, maintainability, and reliability. Despite the unique challenges RSEs face, addressing these through structured processes, improved tools, and targeted training can enhance peer review adoption and effectiveness in research software development.

Related papers

• The Story is Not the Science: Execution-Grounded Evaluation of Mechanistic Interpretability Research [56.80927148740585]
  We address the challenges of scalability and rigor by flipping the dynamic and developing AI agents as research evaluators.<n>We use mechanistic interpretability research as a testbed, build standardized research output, and develop MechEvalAgent.<n>Our work demonstrates the potential of AI agents to transform research evaluation and pave the way for rigorous scientific practices.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-05T19:00:02Z)
• Towards A Sustainable Future for Peer Review in Software Engineering [5.42073906150267]
  The rapid growth of paper submissions in software engineering venues has outpaced the availability of qualified reviewers.<n>Our vision of the Future of the SE research landscape involves a more scalable, inclusive, and resilient peer review process.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-01-29T14:14:44Z)
• Let the Barbarians In: How AI Can Accelerate Systems Performance Research [80.43506848683633]
  We term this iterative cycle of generation, evaluation, and refinement AI-Driven Research for Systems.<n>We demonstrate that ADRS-generated solutions can match or even outperform human state-of-the-art designs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-12-16T18:51:23Z)
• Deep Research: A Systematic Survey [118.82795024422722]
  Deep Research (DR) aims to combine the reasoning capabilities of large language models with external tools, such as search engines.<n>This survey presents a comprehensive and systematic overview of deep research systems.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-11-24T15:28:28Z)
• Oops!... I did it again. Conclusion (In-)Stability in Quantitative Empirical Software Engineering: A Large-Scale Analysis [5.94721915761333]
  Mining software repositories is a popular means to gain insights into a software project's evolution.<n>This study investigates some threats to validity in complex tool pipelines for evolutionary software analyses.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-10-08T10:11:39Z)
• The Software Observatory: aggregating and analysing software metadata for trend computation and FAIR assessment [0.0]
  The Software Observatory at OpenEBench is a novel web portal that consolidates software metadata from various sources.<n>Our platform enables users to analyse trends, identify patterns and advancements within the Life Sciences research software ecosystem.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-10-07T09:15:02Z)
• The AI Imperative: Scaling High-Quality Peer Review in Machine Learning [49.87236114682497]
  We argue that AI-assisted peer review must become an urgent research and infrastructure priority.<n>We propose specific roles for AI in enhancing factual verification, guiding reviewer performance, assisting authors in quality improvement, and supporting ACs in decision-making.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-06-09T18:37:14Z)
• Identifying Aspects in Peer Reviews [59.02879434536289]
  We develop a data-driven schema for deriving aspects from a corpus of peer reviews.<n>We introduce a dataset of peer reviews augmented with aspects and show how it can be used for community-level review analysis.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-04-09T14:14:42Z)
• Human-AI Experience in Integrated Development Environments: A Systematic Literature Review [2.1749194587826026]
  The integration of Artificial Intelligence into Integrated Development Environments (IDEs) is reshaping how developers interact with their tools.<n>This shift marks the emergence of Human-AI Experience in Integrated Development Environment (in-IDE HAX)<n>Research on in-IDE HAX remains fragmented, which highlights the need for a unified overview of current practices, challenges, and opportunities.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-03-08T12:40:18Z)
• A Literature Review of Literature Reviews in Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence [51.26815896167173]
  We present a comprehensive tertiary analysis of PAMI reviews along three complementary dimensions.<n>Our analyses reveal distinctive organizational patterns as well as persistent gaps in current review practices.<n>Finally, our evaluation of state-of-the-art AI-generated reviews indicates encouraging advances in coherence and organization.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-20T11:28:50Z)
• Domain-Driven Design in Software Development: A Systematic Literature Review on Implementation, Challenges, and Effectiveness [0.9963916732353794]
  Domain-Driven Design (DDD) has gained significant attention in software development.<n>This study provides an analysis of existing research on DDD in software development.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-03T09:22:53Z)
• A Metadata-Based Ecosystem to Improve the FAIRness of Research Software [0.3185506103768896]
  The reuse of research software is central to research efficiency and academic exchange. The DataDesc ecosystem is presented, an approach to describing data models of software interfaces with detailed and machine-actionable metadata.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-06-18T19:01:08Z)

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.