Implications of artifact evaluation on paper acceptance about artifact-evaluation HOT 5 OPEN

My opinion is that it must go without saying that if the artifact evaluation reveals flaws that the authors cannot explain, then the paper acceptance must be reexamined.

Ideally, the artefact evaluation should be part of the paper review process and done in parallel. Evaluators should be able to give reviewers their opinion while papers are being discussed.

from artifact-evaluation.

I totally agree, but I remember that this question was controversially discussed at a previous ICSE town hall meeting (I think it was in Buenos Aires).

from artifact-evaluation.

One major concern here: does this create a disincentive for authors to submit artifacts? That is, given the choice between:

1. Publish paper without artifact, get paper accepted and
2. Take time to prepare artifact, risk paper gets rejected based on artifact
   Why would an author take choice 1?

from artifact-evaluation.

I think the long term goal should be that 1. is not possible without justification (e.g., NDA with company). So the question is what to do in the meantime...

from artifact-evaluation.

@sbaltes this is something we aim to push for in the SIGSOFT open science policies (will put them out here as well)

from artifact-evaluation.