Experimental evaluation in computer science: A quantitative study

Walter F. Tichy, Paul Lukowicz, Lutz Prechelt, Ernst A. Heinz
1995 Journal of Systems and Software  
A survey of over 400 recent research articles suggests that computer scientists publish relatively few papers with experimentally validated r esults. The survey includes complete volumes of several refereed c omputer science journals, a conference, and 50 titles drawn at random from all articles published b y A CM in 1993. The journals Optical Engineering OE and Neural Computation NC were used for comparison. Of the papers in the random sample that would require experimental validation, 40 have
more » ... none at all. In journals related to software engineering, this fraction is over 50. In comparison, the fraction of papers lacking quantitative evaluation in OE and NC is only 15 and 12, respectively. Conversely, the fraction of papers that devote one fth or more of their space to experimental validation is almost 70 for OE and NC, while it is a mere 30 for the CS random sample and 20 for software engineering. The low ratio of validated r esults appears to be a serious weakness in computer science r esearch. This weakness should be r ecti ed for the long-term health of the eld.
doi:10.1016/0164-1212(94)00111-y fatcat:3mozsrarmzcxfhh4yfbnwfqtgm