https://github.com/researchart/fse18/tree/master/submissions/android-taint

https://github.com/researchart/fse18/tree/master/submissions/dependency-conflicts

https://github.com/researchart/fse18/tree/master/submissions/first-pointer

The artifact consists of a package related to A Multi-Track Automata Based Counter, namely MT-ABC.
The artifact is interesting and relevant for this venue.
The artifact adheres to the requirements of the FSE’18 Artifacts Track.
The artifact package includes the source code.
The artifact package involves the scripts (along with the steps) to run a set of experiments and generate the results.
The artifact is well documented, consistent, and it incorporates evidence of validation.
I therefore believe that this artifact package can be useful for the research community working in this field. I suggest a Functional badge.

https://github.com/researchart/fse18/tree/master/submissions/parameterized-model-counting

Artifacts Upload for EVENTNAME (Paper PAPERID) TRACKNAME

Dear AUTHORS,

Your artifact was positively evaluated by the artifact-evaluation committee (AEC)
and your publication will receive certain badges as a result of this process.

In addition, you have the option to publish your artifact (in a citable form),
and receive another badge "Artifact Available" for this.

Please upload your artifact metadata (and your artifact, if to be published with ACM)
via the following link:
SUBMISSIONLINKARTIFACT

The deadline for the upload (metadata and artifact) is ONEWEEKFROMNOW.

Publication of artifact via ACM DL:
By submitting your artifact to the ACM DL, you ensure
long-term availability, open access, and immutability for your artifact,
and receive a DOI (digital object identifier) for the artifact,
such that your artifact can be cited as publication.

It is not necessary to transfer copyright for the artifact to ACM:
ACM only requires a permission to distribute the artifact in the ACM DL,
which is assigned as part of the publishing-rights agreement for the paper.
Please make sure that you clicked that option in your publishing-rights agreement.
If you did not allow ACM to publish your material, please contact us
(and we enable a new publishing-rights form).

Publication of artifact via external provider:
If you have published your artifact already via Zenodo or FigShare
and you do not want to publish your artifact in the ACM Digital Library,
you still need to complete the metadata fields for the record in the ACM DL.
Please also open the URL above and complete our artifact-submission form.

GitHub or similar repositories are not sufficient to receive an "Artifact Available" badge.
If you so far host your artifact on GitHub (or similar), you can simply
download the release zip archive from GitHub and upload this file to us (for the ACM DL).
(Note that the zip file must contain a license and readme file.)

Or, even simpler, you can publish GitHub releases via Zenodo:
https://guides.github.com/activities/citable-code/

Best regards,

Your Proceedings Team
Conference Publishing Consulting

https://github.com/researchart/fse18/tree/master/submissions/function-embedding

https://github.com/researchart/fse18/tree/master/submissions/adversarial-symbolic-execution

https://github.com/researchart/fse18/tree/master/submissions/DifferentialDebuggerTesting

https://github.com/researchart/fse18/tree/master/submissions/detection-of-clones

https://github.com/researchart/fse18/tree/master/submissions/blizzard

https://github.com/researchart/fse18/tree/master/submissions/presence-effects

https://github.com/researchart/fse18/tree/master/submissions/Phys-inconsistency

https://github.com/researchart/fse18/tree/master/submissions/sbaltes-expertise-artifact

https://github.com/researchart/fse18/tree/master/submissions/energy

https://github.com/researchart/fse18/tree/master/submissions/code-vectors

This artifact consists of a package related to a clone detector, Oreo, designed to find code clones in the Twilight zone.
The artifact is very interesting and relevant for this track.
The artifact adheres to the requirements of the FSE’18 Artifacts Track.
The artifact package includes the source code made available by the authors under github.
The artifact package includes the input data needed for running the tool.
The artifact package also provide the material used for the tool evaluation involving files of precision and recall experiments. The data provided were used in the associated research paper.
Overall, I find that this artifact package is well presented making it easy, for the research community, to reuse for replication purposes. It can therefore make a nice contribution to the FSE’18 Artifact Track. Consequently, I assign to it a Reusable badge.

https://github.com/researchart/fse18/tree/master/submissions/pattern-fuzzing

https://github.com/researchart/fse18/tree/master/submissions/ajax-race

This artifact consists of material related to the research paper on Adversarial Symbolic Execution for Detecting Concurrency-related Cache Timing Leaks.
The artifact is interesting and relevant for this venue.
The artifact adheres to the requirements of the FSE’18 Artifacts Track.
The artifact package includes the tarball file made available by the authors on the google drive.
The artifact package includes the benchmarks used in the research paper as well as the scripts needed to run these benchmarks.
Different alternatives for the execution of the approach have been shown by the authors.
The artifact is well documented and structured. In addition, it involves evidence of validation.
I marked it as of Functional Badge.

https://github.com/researchart/fse18/tree/master/submissions/denial-of-service

This artifact consists of a package related to a research work on the practical Ajax race detection for JavaScript web applications.
The artifact is very interesting and relevant for this track.
The artifact adheres to the requirements of the FSE’18 Artifacts Track.
The artifact package includes all the instructions related to the installation of AjaxRacer.
The artifact package includes the procedure to view the results. It also provides ways to run the corresponding experiments.
Additionally, the artifact package presents a set of end-to-end tests with all the steps and commands to run the tests.
Finally, the authors provided a script to debug AjaxRacer.
The artifact is well documented and structured. It can make a great contribution to the FSE’18 Artifact Track. I believe it can be of a Resusable badge.

https://github.com/researchart/fse18/tree/master/submissions/PyPI-Ecosystem

https://github.com/researchart/fse18/tree/master/submissions/data-race

https://github.com/researchart/fse18/tree/master/submissions/datalog

This is a pace for the PC chairs to dribble out notes on what words, does not work for artifacts

Random notes at submission time

Low numbers. Why:

• ?low community interest in artifacts.
• ? hard to distinguish from tool track.

Poor conformance to the format we offered for artifact submission.

• Was the format wrong? In terms of light to heavyweight, it was on the lightweight side.
• Is the community still divided on "right format"? The folks with a VM just ignored our notes and offered a VM. after a 3 minute download and a 4 minute "import to virtual box" session, we had their code working perfectly on a reviewer machine. should we just demand VMs all the time?

Working in Github

v.cool. interaction with artifact authors is much more complex than supported by, say, easychair. debates on what to download, what to keep at central site

Writing artifacts

• Keep it short: 11BG (unzipped)? Wild. Maybe artifacts should be "teasers". Things we can fast download and peek out and taste before swallowing.
  • Note, some of the bigger downloads from Google Drive just timed out without downloading. Internet still needs debugging.
• Art to authoring "cliff notes" (i.e. short intro). Need some support text in the repo. e.g https://github.com/researchart/fse18/blob/master/submissions/pattern-fuzzing/README.md. Note that these are the notes that a web surfer would use to decide if they want to use this or not.