This Article 
   
 Share 
   
 Bibliographic References 
   
 Add to: 
 
Digg
Furl
Spurl
Blink
Simpy
Google
Del.icio.us
Y!MyWeb
 
 Search 
   
Five Recommended Practices for Computational Scientists Who Write Software
September/October 2009 (vol. 11 no. 5)
pp. 48-53
Diane Kelly, Royal Military College of Canada
Daniel Hook, Queen's University
Rebecca Sanders, PlateSpin

Few software engineering techniques and approaches are specifically useful for computational scientists, and despite recent efforts, it could be many years before a consolidated handbook is available. Meanwhile, computational scientists can look to the practices of other scientists who write successful software.

1. D.E. Stevenson, "A Critical Look at Quality in Large-Scale Simulations," Computing in Science &Eng., vol. 1, no. 3, 1999, pp. 53–63.
2. D.C. Arnold and J.J. Dongarra, "Developing an Architecture to Support the Implementation and Development of Scientific Computing Applications," The Architecture of Scientific Software, R.F. Boisvert, and P.T. Peter Tang eds., Kluwer Academic, 2000, pp. 39–56.
3. D. Kelly, N. Cote, and T. Shepard, "Software Engineers and Nuclear Engineers: Teaming up to Do Testing," Proc. Canadian Nuclear Soc. Conf., Canadian Nuclear Soc., 2007.
4. R.L. Glass, Facts and Fallacies of Software Engineering, Addison-Wesley Professional, 2002.
5. D. Kelly, "A Study of Design Characteristics in Evolving Software Using Stability as a Criterion," IEEE Trans. Software Eng., vol 32, no. 5, 2006, pp. 315–329.
6. D. Kelly, "Determining Factors that Affect Long-Term Evolution in Scientific Application Software," J. Systems and Software, vol. 82, no. 5, 2009, pp. 851–861.
7. G. Wilson, "Where's the Real Bottleneck in Scientific Computing?" Am. Scientist, vol. 49, no. 1, 2006, p. 5.
8. IEEE Std. 1042-1987, Guide to Software Configuration Management (SCM), IEEE, 1987.
9. L. Hatton and A. Roberts, "How Accurate Is Scientific Software?" IEEE Trans. Software Eng., vol. 20, no. 10, 1994, pp. 785–797.
10. G. Miller, "Scientific Publishing: A Scientist's Nightmare: Software Problem Leads to Five Retractions," Science, vol. 314, Dec. 2006, pp. 1856–1857.
11. R. Sanders and D. Kelly, "Scientific Software: Where's the Risk and How Do Scientists Deal With It?" IEEE Software, vol. 25, no. 4, 2008, pp. 21–28.
12. D. Kelly and T. Shepard, "Task-Directed Inspection," J. Systems and Software, vol. 73, no. 2, 2004, pp. 361–368.
13. M.E. Fagan, "Design and Code Inspections to Reduce Errors in Program Development," IBM Systems J., vol. 15, no. 3, 1976, pp. 182–211.
14. R.L. Glass, "Inspections—Some Surprising Findings," Comm. ACM, vol. 42, no. 4, 1999, pp. 17–19.
15. K. Wiegers, "The More Things Change," Better Software, Oct. 2006; www.borland.com/resources/en/pdf/solutions cm-more-things-change.pdf.
16. P.J. Roache, "Building PDE Codes to be Verifiable and Validatable," Computing in Science &Eng., vol. 6, no. 5, 2004, pp. 30–38.
17. W.L. Oberkampf, T.G. Trucano, and C. Hirsch, "Verification, Validation, and Predictive Capability in Computational Engineering and Physics," Applied Mechanics Rev., vol. 57, no. 5, 2004, pp. 345–384.

Index Terms:
scientific software
Citation:
Diane Kelly, Daniel Hook, Rebecca Sanders, "Five Recommended Practices for Computational Scientists Who Write Software," Computing in Science and Engineering, vol. 11, no. 5, pp. 48-53, Sept.-Oct. 2009, doi:10.1109/MCSE.2009.139
Usage of this product signifies your acceptance of the Terms of Use.