# Empirical Standards for Software Engineering Research

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2010.03525 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2010.03525/

## Key facts

- Cited by 4 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- First posted on arXiv 7 Oct 2020.

## Built on by (most cited first, 4 of 4)

- [Get on the Train or be Left on the Station: Using LLMs for Software Engineering Research](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2506.12691/) (2025)
- [Multi-Agent Debate Strategies: Survey, Taxonomy, and Challenges](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2607.26212/) (2026)
- [Has LLM Screening Performance Stalled in Software Engineering Systematic Reviews?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2610.10633/) (2026)
- [One Skill Too Many: How Co-Installed Skills Conflict in Coding Agents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2610.11647/) (2026)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Empirical Standards are natural-language models of a scientific community's expectations for a specific kind of study (e.g. a questionnaire survey). The ACM SIGSOFT Paper and Peer Review Quality Initiative generated empirical standards for research methods commonly used in software engineering. These living documents, which should be continuously revised to reflect evolving consensus around research best practices, will improve research quality and make peer review more effective, reliable, transparent and fair.