REVIEW 2 cited by
On Code Reuse from StackOverflow: An Exploratory Study on Jupyter Notebook
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
On Code Reuse from StackOverflow: An Exploratory Study on Jupyter Notebook
read the original abstract
Jupyter Notebook is a popular tool among data analysts and scientists for working with data. It provides a way to combine code, documentation, and visualizations in a single, interactive environment, facilitating code reuse. While code reuse can improve programming efficiency, it can also decrease readability, security, and overall performance. We conduct a large-scale exploratory study of code reuse practices in the Jupyter Notebook development community on the Stack Overflow platform to understand the potential negative impacts of code reuse. Our findings identified 1,097,470 Jupyter Notebook clone pairs that reuse Stack Overflow code snippets, and the average code snippet has 7.91 code quality violations. Through our research, we gain insight into the reasons behind Jupyter Notebook developers' decision to reuse code and the potential drawbacks of this practice.
Forward citations
Cited by 2 Pith papers
-
Developer-LLM Conversations: An Empirical Study of Interactions and Generated Code Quality
Analyzing 82,845 real ChatGPT coding chats shows generated code frequently has language-specific issues, with some quality problems persisting or worsening over multiple turns.
-
Industry Practitioners Perspectives on AI Model Quality: Perceptions, Challenges, and Solutions
Industry AI practitioners view model quality through nine attributes with context-dependent priorities, where data imbalance is a key challenge addressed by strategies like active learning, as confirmed by interviews ...
discussion (0)
Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.