Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 4

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 9 of the 9 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

When Domains Collide: An Activity Theory Exploration of Cross-Disciplinary Collaboration

Feng, Zixuan, Zimmermann, Thomas, Pisani, Lorenzo, Gooley, Christopher, Wander, Jeremiah, Sarma, Anita·2025·2025 ACM/IEEE International Symposium on Empirical Software Engineering and Measurement (ESEM)
DOI 10.1109/esem64174.2025.00017
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1109/esem64174.2025.00017

Cites

9 of 9 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Research works printed but not linked: 65

  1. 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1005265 · DOI
  2. 10.1002/ajmg.c.31866 · DOI
  3. Siddique, 2024, Leveraging ai in medical engineering for targeted cancer therapy delivery, Journal Environmental Sciences And Technology, 3
  4. 10.1109/SEHC.2013.6602469 · DOI
  5. 10.1109/SMC.2017.8122757 · DOI
  6. 10.1002/spe.3120 · DOI
  7. 10.1109/CHASE.2017.3 · DOI
  8. 10.1145/2884781.2884783 · DOI
  9. 10.1109/tse.2017.2754374 · DOI · Paper page
  10. 10.1145/3510003.3510209 · DOI
  11. 10.1017/CBO9780511812774.003 · DOI · Paper page
  12. de Souza, 2003, Using activity theory to understand contradictions in collaborative software development
  13. 10.1007/s10664-025-10629-x · DOI
  14. 10.1145/3643664.3648206 · DOI
  15. Brooks, 1995, The mythical man-month: essays on software engineering, Pearson Education
  16. 10.1109/FOSE.2007.4 · DOI · Paper page
  17. 10.1109/PROC.1980.11805 · DOI · Paper page
  18. 10.26481/umamer.1995006 · DOI
  19. Royce, 1987, Managing the development of large software systems: concepts and techniques, 328
  20. 10.1145/12944.12948 · DOI
  21. 10.1016/0164-1212(81)90004-2 · DOI
  22. 10.1145/3408314 · DOI · Paper page
  23. Sculley, 2015, Hidden technical debt in machine learning systems, Advances in neural information processing systems, 28
  24. 10.1109/ICSE-SEIP.2019.00042 · DOI · Paper page
  25. 10.1145/2568225.2568226 · DOI
  26. 10.1016/j.jss.2018.11.041 · DOI · Paper page
  27. 10.1109/TEM.2019.2936678 · DOI
  28. 10.1111/j.1751-9004.2008.00147.x · DOI · Paper page
  29. 10.12806/V13/I4/C8 · DOI
  30. 10.1007/978-94-007-6772-0_3 · DOI
  31. 10.1080/14606925.2017.1352958 · DOI
  32. 10.1080/03075079.2023.2172564 · DOI
  33. 10.7551/mitpress/2137.003.0008 · DOI · Paper page
  34. 10.1007/BF02249399 · DOI · Paper page
  35. Charmaz, 2006, Constructing grounded theory: A practical guide through qualitative analysis, Sage
  36. Martin, 2009, Clean code: a handbook of agile software craftsmanship, Pearson Education
  37. 2011, I. O. for Standardization, Systems and Software Engineering - Systems and Software Quality Requirements and Evaluation (SQuaRE) - System and Software Quality Models, International Organization for Standardization Std
  38. 2025, Appendix to the when domains collide: An activity theory exploration of cross-disciplinary collaboration
  39. 10.1037/0022-0167.52.2.137 · DOI · Paper page
  40. 10.1016/j.socscimed.2021.114523 · DOI · Paper page
  41. 10.1145/3613904.3642737 · DOI
  42. 10.1037/13620-004 · DOI · Paper page
  43. 10.1016/j.iheduc.2005.11.001 · DOI · Paper page
  44. Britz, 2000, Improving performance through statistical thinking, (No Title)
  45. Spencer, 2009, Card sorting: Designing usable categories, Rosenfeld Media
  46. 2021, The 2021 linux foundation report on diversity, equity and inclusion in open source, The Linux Foundation, Tech. Rep.
  47. 10.1109/CHASE58964.2023.00024 · DOI
  48. 10.1145/3540250.3549167 · DOI · Paper page
  49. 10.1109/CHASE66643.2025.00031 · DOI · Paper page
  50. 10.20982/tqmp.04.1.p013 · DOI · Paper page
  51. 10.1016/j.respol.2021.104356 · DOI
  52. 10.1093/scipol/scv035 · DOI
  53. 10.1108/JAOC-11-2016-0079 · DOI
  54. Mukherjee, 2015, Coopting formal and informal structures, Emergence: Complexity & Organization, 17, 1
  55. 10.1007/978-3-642-15187-3_8 · DOI
  56. Hutchins, 2000, Distributed cognition, International encyclopedia of the social and behavioral sciences, 138, 1
  57. Wenger, 2011, Communities of practice: A brief introduction
  58. 10.1016/j.infsof.2024.107470 · DOI
  59. 10.1016/j.scico.2014.11.010 · DOI · Paper page
  60. 10.1007/s11135-006-9000-3 · DOI · Paper page
  61. Fursin, 2016, Collective knowledge: Towards r&d sustainability, 864
  62. 10.1080/23311886.2020.1838706 · DOI · Paper page
  63. Townsend, 2013, Saturation and run off: How many interviews are required in qualitative research, 1
  64. 10.1177/1525822X05279903 · DOI · Paper page
  65. Creswell, 2016, Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches, Sage publications

Cited by

See all 4

Metadata

Authors
Feng, Z., Zimmermann, T., Pisani, L., Gooley, C., Wander, J., & Sarma, A.
Affiliations
  • Oregon State University,USA
  • University of California,Irvine,USA
  • Microsoft Research,USA
Venue
2025 ACM/IEEE International Symposium on Empirical Software Engineering and Measurement (ESEM)
Publisher
IEEE
Published
2025-10-02
Pages
301-312
DOI
10.1109/esem64174.2025.00017
Cited by
4
References
9
Licence
Funders
NSF (2303043)

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.