In this episode we are joined by Thaleia Doudali, Miguel Matos, and Anjo Vahldiek-Oberwagner to delve into five years of experience managing artifact evaluation at the EuroSys conference. They explain the goals and mechanics of artifact evaluation, a voluntary process that encourages reproducibility and reusability in computer systems research by assessing the supporting code, data, and documentation of accepted papers. The conversation outlines the three-tiered badge system, the multi-phase review process, and the importance of open-source practices. The guests present data showing increasing participation, sustained artifact availability, and varying levels of community engagement, underscoring the growing relevance of artifacts in validating and extending research.The discussion also highlights recurring challenges such as tight timelines between paper acceptance and camera-ready deadlines, disparities in expectations between main program and artifact committees, difficulties with specialized hardware requirements, and lack of institutional continuity among evaluators. To address these, the guests propose early artifact preparation, stronger integration across committees, formalization of evaluation guidelines, and possibly making artifact submission mandatory. They advocate for broader standardization across CS subfields and suggest introducing a “Test of Time” award for artifacts. Looking to the future, they envision a more scalable, consistent, and impactful artifact evaluation process—but caution that continued growth in paper volume will demand innovation to maintain quality and reviewer sustainability.Links:Lessons Learned from Five Years of Artifact Evaluations at EuroSys [DOI] Thaleia's HomepageAnjo's HomepageMiguel's Homepage Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Ver todos los episodios