Systematic reviews are the standard method for synthesizing scientific evidence, but their creation requires substantial manual effort, particularly during retrieval and screening. While recent work has explored automating these steps, evaluation resources remain largely confined to the biomedical domain, limiting reproducible experimentation in other domains. This paper introduces SR4CS, a large-scale collection of systematic reviews in computer science, designed to support reproducible research on Boolean query generation, retrieval, and screening. The corpus comprises 1,212 systematic reviews with their original expert-designed Boolean search queries, 104,316 resolved references, and structured methodological metadata. For controlled evaluation, the original Boolean queries are additionally provided in a normalized, approximated form operating over titles and abstracts. To illustrate the intended use of the collection, baseline experiments compare the approximated expert Boolean queries with zero-shot LLM-generated Boolean queries, BM25, and dense retrieval under a unified evaluation setting. The results highlight systematic differences in precision, recall, and ranking behavior across retrieval paradigms and expose limitations of naive zero-shot Boolean generation. SR4CS is released under an open license on Zenodo (https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.17163932), together with documentation and code (https://github.com/webis-de/scolia26-sr4cs), to enable reproducible evaluation and future research on scaling systematic review automation.