Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 cited by

Empirical Analysis on CI/CD Pipeline Evolution in Machine Learning Projects

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2403.12199 v4 pith:Y74B7B6A submitted 2024-03-18 cs.SE

classification cs.SE
keywords changeprojectsanalysisconfigurationconfigurationscommitsintegrationservices
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

The growing popularity of machine learning (ML) and the integration of ML components with other software artifacts has led to the use of continuous integration and delivery (CI/CD) tools, such as Travis CI, GitHub Actions, etc. that enable faster integration and testing for ML projects. Such CI/CD configurations and services require synchronization during the life cycle of the projects. Several works discussed how CI/CD configuration and services change during their usage in traditional software systems. However, there is very limited knowledge of how CI/CD configuration and services change in ML projects. To fill this knowledge gap, this work presents the first empirical analysis of how CI/CD configuration evolves for ML software systems. We manually analyzed 343 commits collected from 508 open-source ML projects to identify common CI/CD configuration change categories in ML projects and devised a taxonomy of 14 co-changes in CI/CD and ML components. Moreover, we developed a CI/CD configuration change clustering tool that identified frequent CI/CD configuration change patterns in 15,634 commits. Furthermore, we measured the expertise of ML developers who modify CI/CD configurations. Based on this analysis, we found that 61.8% of commits include a change to the build policy and minimal changes related to performance and maintainability compared to general open-source projects. Additionally, the co-evolution analysis identified that CI/CD configurations, in many cases, changed unnecessarily due to bad practices such as the direct inclusion of dependencies and a lack of usage of standardized testing frameworks. More practices were found through the change patterns analysis consisting of using deprecated settings and reliance on a generic build language. Finally, our developer's expertise analysis suggests that experienced developers are more inclined to modify CI/CD configurations.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 2 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. How Do AI Coding Agents Contribute to Software Development? an Empirical Study of Agentic Pull Requests

    cs.SE 2026-07 conditional novelty 4.0 of 10

    AI coding agents mostly handle routine, well-scoped development tasks; their pull requests are merged at similar rates and have comparable or lower bug-proneness than human-written pull requests across repository lifecycles.

  2. An Empirical Study of Complexity, Heterogeneity, and Compliance of GitHub Actions Workflows

    cs.SE 2025-07 reject novelty 4.0 of 10

    The paper presents a research proposal for analyzing GHA workflow complexity, heterogeneity, and compliance, while its abstract asserts completed empirical findings that the body never delivers.

Pith tools