James Howison

Eva Maxfield Brown, Stephan Druskat, Laurent Hébert-Dufresne et al.

Despite the importance of scientific software for research, it is often not formally recognized and rewarded. This is especially true for foundational libraries, which are hidden below packages visible to the users (and thus doubly hidden, since even the packages directly used in research are frequently not visible in the paper). Research stakeholders like funders, infrastructure providers, and other organizations need to understand the complex network of computer programs that contemporary research relies upon. In this work, we use the CZ Software Mentions Dataset to map the upstream dependencies of software used in biomedical papers and find the packages critical to scientific software ecosystems. We propose centrality metrics for the network of software dependencies, analyze three ecosystems (PyPi, CRAN, Bioconductor), and determine the packages with the highest centrality.

Lois Curfman McInnes, Dorian Arnold, Prasanna Balaprakash et al.

This report summarizes insights from the 2025 Workshop on Next-Generation Ecosystems for Scientific Computing: Harnessing Community, Software, and AI for Cross-Disciplinary Team Science, which convened more than 40 experts from national laboratories, academia, industry, and community organizations to chart a path toward more powerful, sustainable, and collaborative scientific software ecosystems. To address urgent challenges at the intersection of high-performance computing (HPC), AI, and scientific software, participants envisioned agile, robust ecosystems built through socio-technical co-design--the intentional integration of social and technical components as interdependent parts of a unified strategy. This approach combines advances in AI, HPC, and software with new models for cross-disciplinary collaboration, training, and workforce development. Key recommendations include building modular, trustworthy AI-enabled scientific software systems; enabling scientific teams to integrate AI systems into their workflows while preserving human creativity, trust, and scientific rigor; and creating innovative training pipelines that keep pace with rapid technological change. Pilot projects were identified as near-term catalysts, with initial priorities focused on hybrid AI/HPC infrastructure, cross-disciplinary collaboration and pedagogy, responsible AI guidelines, and prototyping of public-private partnerships. This report presents a vision of next-generation ecosystems for scientific computing where AI, software, hardware, and human expertise are interwoven to drive discovery, expand access, strengthen the workforce, and accelerate scientific progress.

Christopher Bogart, James Howison, James Herbsleb

Software is increasingly produced in the form of ecosystems, collections of interdependent components maintained by a distributed community. These ecosystems act as network organizations, not markets, and thus often lack actionable price-like signals about how the software is used and what impact it has. We introduce a tool, the Scientific Software Network Map, that collects and displays summarized usage data tailored to the needs of actors in software ecosystems. We performed a contextualized walkthrough of the Map with producers and stewards in six scientific software ecosystems that use the R language. We found that they work to maximize diversity rather than quantity of uses, and to minimize coordination costs. We also found that summarized usage data would be useful for justifying ecosystem work to funding agencies; and we discovered a variety of more granular usage needs that would help in adding or maintaining features.

Caroline Jay, Robert Haines, Daniel S. Katz et al.

The Theory-Software Translation Workshop, held in New Orleans in February 2019, explored in depth the process of both instantiating theory in software - for example, implementing a mathematical model in code as part of a simulation - and using the outputs of software - such as the behavior of a simulation - to advance knowledge. As computation within research is now ubiquitous, the workshop provided a timely opportunity to reflect on the particular challenges of research software engineering - the process of developing and maintaining software for scientific discovery. In addition to the general challenges common to all software development projects, research software additionally must represent, manipulate, and provide data for complex theoretical constructs. Ensuring this process is robust is essential to maintaining the integrity of the science resulting from it, and the workshop highlighted a number of areas where the current approach to research software engineering would benefit from an evidence base that could be used to inform best practice. The workshop brought together expert research software engineers and academics to discuss the challenges of Theory-Software Translation over a two-day period. This report provides an overview of the workshop activities, and a synthesises of the discussion that was recorded. The body of the report presents a thematic analysis of the challenges of Theory-Software Translation as identified by workshop participants, summarises these into a set of research areas, and provides recommendations for the future direction of this work.

Daniel S. Katz, Sou-Cheng T. Choi, Nancy Wilkins-Diehr et al.

This technical report records and discusses the Second Workshop on Sustainable Software for Science: Practice and Experiences (WSSSPE2). The report includes a description of the alternative, experimental submission and review process, two workshop keynote presentations, a series of lightning talks, a discussion on sustainability, and five discussions from the topic areas of exploring sustainability; software development experiences; credit & incentives; reproducibility & reuse & sharing; and code testing & code review. For each topic, the report includes a list of tangible actions that were proposed and that would lead to potential change. The workshop recognized that reliance on scientific software is pervasive in all areas of world-leading research today. The workshop participants then proceeded to explore different perspectives on the concept of sustainability. Key enablers and barriers of sustainable scientific software were identified from their experiences. In addition, recommendations with new requirements such as software credit files and software prize frameworks were outlined for improving practices in sustainable software engineering. There was also broad consensus that formal training in software development or engineering was rare among the practitioners. Significant strides need to be made in building a sense of community via training in software and technical practices, on increasing their size and scope, and on better integrating them directly into graduate education programs. Finally, journals can define and publish policies to improve reproducibility, whereas reviewers can insist that authors provide sufficient information and access to data and software to allow them reproduce the results in the paper. Hence a list of criteria is compiled for journals to provide to reviewers so as to make it easier to review software submitted for publication as a "Software Paper."

Daniel S. Katz, Sou-Cheng T. Choi, Hilmar Lapp et al.

Challenges related to development, deployment, and maintenance of reusable software for science are becoming a growing concern. Many scientists' research increasingly depends on the quality and availability of software upon which their works are built. To highlight some of these issues and share experiences, the First Workshop on Sustainable Software for Science: Practice and Experiences (WSSSPE1) was held in November 2013 in conjunction with the SC13 Conference. The workshop featured keynote presentations and a large number (54) of solicited extended abstracts that were grouped into three themes and presented via panels. A set of collaborative notes of the presentations and discussion was taken during the workshop. Unique perspectives were captured about issues such as comprehensive documentation, development and deployment practices, software licenses and career paths for developers. Attribution systems that account for evidence of software contribution and impact were also discussed. These include mechanisms such as Digital Object Identifiers, publication of "software papers", and the use of online systems, for example source code repositories like GitHub. This paper summarizes the issues and shared experiences that were discussed, including cross-cutting issues and use cases. It joins a nascent literature seeking to understand what drives software work in science, and how it is impacted by the reward systems of science. These incentives can determine the extent to which developers are motivated to build software for the long-term, for the use of others, and whether to work collaboratively or separately. It also explores community building, leadership, and dynamics in relation to successful scientific software.