scholarly journals Open-Source Software in Computational Research: A Case Study

2008 ◽  
Vol 2008 ◽  
pp. 1-10 ◽  
Author(s):  
Madhava Syamlal ◽  
Thomas J. O'Brien ◽  
Sofiane Benyahia ◽  
Aytekin Gel ◽  
Sreekanth Pannala

A case study of open-source (OS) development of the computational research software MFIX, used for multiphase computational fluid dynamics simulations, is presented here. The verification and validation steps required for constructing modern computational software and the advantages of OS development in those steps are discussed. The infrastructure used for enabling the OS development of MFIX is described. The impact of OS development on computational research and education in gas-solids flow, as well as the dissemination of information to other areas such as geophysical and volcanology research, is demonstrated. This study shows that the advantages of OS development were realized in the case of MFIX: verification by many users, which enhances software quality; the use of software as a means for accumulating and exchanging information; the facilitation of peer review of the results of computational research.

MIS Quarterly ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 43 (3) ◽  
pp. 951-976
Author(s):  
Likoebe M. Maruping ◽  
◽  
Sherae L. Daniel ◽  
Marcelo Cataldo ◽  
◽  
...  

Author(s):  
Erin Polka ◽  
Ellen Childs ◽  
Alexa Friedman ◽  
Kathryn S. Tomsho ◽  
Birgit Claus Henn ◽  
...  

Sharing individualized results with health study participants, a practice we and others refer to as “report-back,” ensures participant access to exposure and health information and may promote health equity. However, the practice of report-back and the content shared is often limited by the time-intensive process of personalizing reports. Software tools that automate creation of individualized reports have been built for specific studies, but are largely not open-source or broadly modifiable. We created an open-source and generalizable tool, called the Macro for the Compilation of Report-backs (MCR), to automate compilation of health study reports. We piloted MCR in two environmental exposure studies in Massachusetts, USA, and interviewed research team members (n = 7) about the impact of MCR on the report-back process. Researchers using MCR created more detailed reports than during manual report-back, including more individualized numerical, text, and graphical results. Using MCR, researchers saved time producing draft and final reports. Researchers also reported feeling more creative in the design process and more confident in report-back quality control. While MCR does not expedite the entire report-back process, we hope that this open-source tool reduces the barriers to personalizing health study reports, promotes more equitable access to individualized data, and advances self-determination among participants.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document