Poster session. Participants are given 5 minutes each to present their poster (where they look for collaboration in a specific topic). The rest of the time people are left free to talk to the presenters.

A proposal of the collaborative experiment about the integrative project management using the Cloud environment with an in-process measurement facility. Yoshiki Mitani. Information-Technology Promotion Agency (IPA), Japan

Proposal for replication of an experiment about real-time machine translation . Filippo Lanubile. University of Bari, Italy.

GQM+Strategies. Vic Basili, University of Maryland/Fraunhofer Center-Maryland, USA (4 posters)

Empirical investigation of safety engineering methods. Stefan Wagner. University of Stuttgart, Germany.

During the Banff meeting, Per Runeson and Sira Vegas were assigned the task to work on a core reading list for ISERN members. Although this list is mainly for new members, it is of interest for the whole community. The initial list will be presented and people will be asked to provide feedback.

Description: The workshop aims at elaborating existing methods and potential fields of further investigation in the area of empirical software engineering to be transferred to software process improvement in requirements engineering. The overall goal is to build a thematic map and discuss, on basis of this map, potentials to initiate new research collaborations

Description:
If we compare ourselves to the evidence-based approach in medicine, we need to accept that the provision of evidence-based best practices cannot be placed on the shoulders of just a few organizations (people).
In addition, it might be necessary to go beyond the borders of ESE and involve domain experts and practitioners.
The session therefore aims at discussing and identifying the general interest in a community endeavor. Criteria for deciding about what is a best practice or when a technology gets the label ""best practice"" need to be discussed. Finally, we would be interested in ideas on potential SE topics that could be used as a pilot as well as in terms of cooperation and means for dissemination.

Research synthesis aims at analyzing, combining and summarizing the results of individual empirical studies on a research question. It attempts to confirm or build hypotheses as well as to support the prioritization and planning of future research. Research synthesis may also support practitioners in understanding the effects of a software technology, in which context those effects may be expected and how to better adopt it.
In this session, we want to explore how to assess qualitative syntheses in SE. For this purpose, we plan to introduce and evaluate the reliability and validity of a checklist designed for assessing qualitative synthesis in SE.

In 2007, Catalysts started to organize coding contests [1] in order to investigate the research question whether test-driven development is faster and leads to less defects. The contests have grown over the years from initially 60 participants to nearly 300 participants in 2012. Other organizations also perform coding contests – either for recruiting purposes (like Google’s CodeJam and Challenge24), for crowd-sourcing purposes (like TopCoder), or just for the sake of providing a stage for the best coders (like ACM Coding Contests). Since 2011, Catalysts has been gathering Contest Data (about the progress per contestant, including source code per level, etc.) from the contests and has made that data available via public data servers [2].

data to decide upon this:
      - scale mixup: ordinal vs. absolute scale (can do non-parametric vs. parametric tests?).
      - not normal distribution for t-test (skewed data?).