Papers › Evaluation of tools for describing, reproducing and reusing scientific workflows
Evaluation of tools for describing, reproducing and reusing scientific workflows
Philipp Diercks, Dennis Gläser, Ontje Lünsdorf, Michael Selzer, Bernd Flemisch, Jörg F. Unger
The archive published only this paper's code-link row. Authors, date and abstract are from arXiv's metadata (CC0), read from the Kaggle arXiv metadata snapshot of 2026-09-12 where its title matched the archive's; the title is the archive's.
In the field of computational science and engineering, workflows often entail the application of various software, for instance, for simulation or pre- and postprocessing. Typically, these components have to be combined in arbitrarily complex workflows to address a specific research question. In order for peer researchers to understand, reproduce and (re)use the findings of a scientific publication, several challenges have to be addressed. For instance, the employed workflow has to be automated and information on all used software must be available for a reproduction of the results. Moreover, the results must be traceable and the workflow documented and readable to allow for external verification and greater trust. In this paper, existing workflow management systems (WfMSs) are discussed regarding their suitability for describing, reproducing and reusing scientific workflows. To this end, a set of general requirements for WfMSswere deduced from user stories that we deem relevant in the domain of computational science and engineering. On the basis of an exemplary workflow implementation, publicly hosted at GitHub (https:// github.com/BAMresearch/NFDI4IngScientificWorkflowRequirements), a selection of different WfMSs is compared with respect to these requirements, to support fellow scientists in identifying the WfMSs that best suit their requirements.
Code
Repository list and official/mentioned flags are the archive's, frozen 2025-07-28. Reachability, where shown, is from one Syntology probe window (2026-09-16 to 2026-09-18); repositories not probed show nothing. GitHub stars are not tracked.
Code Syntology ran Syntology
Not run by Syntology. Nothing on this page verifies that the listed code works.
Results from the paper archive 2025-07-28
No leaderboard rows for this paper in the archive.
Report a problem or propose a change · a person checks every report against the paper or source before anything changes; decisions are listed on /corrections