@Article{Heroux:2015:EAT,
  author =       "Michael A. Heroux",
  title =        "Editorial: {ACM} {TOMS} Replicated Computational Results Initiative",
  volume =       "41",
  number =       "3",
  journal =      "{ACM} Transactions on Mathematical Software",
  accepted =     "2 March 2015",
  upcoming =     "true", 
  abstract =     "
                  The scientific community relies on the peer review
                  process for assuring the quality of published material,
                  the goal of which is to build a body of work we can
                  trust. Computational journals such as The ACM Transactions
                  on Mathematical Software (TOMS) use this process for
                  rigorously promoting the clarity and completeness of
                  content, and citation of prior work. At the same time, it
                  is unusual to independently confirm computational results.

                  ACM TOMS has established a Replicated Computational
                  Results (RCR) review process as part of the manuscript
                  peer review process. The purpose is to provide independent
                  confirmation that results contained in a manuscript are
                  replicable. Successful completion of the RCR process
                  awards a manuscript with the Replicated Computational
                  Results Designation.

                  This issue of ACM TOMS contains
                  the first [Van Zee and van de Geijn 2015] of what we
                  anticipate to be a growing number of articles to receive
                  the RCR designation, and the related RCR reviewer report
                  [Willenbring 2015]. We hope that the TOMS RCR process
                  will serve as a model for other publications and increase
                  the confidence in and value of computational results in
                  TOMS articles.",
}