REVIEW 1 cited by
When Code Smells Meet ML: On the Lifecycle of ML-specific Code Smells in ML-enabled Systems
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
Signed reviews
read the original abstract
Context. The adoption of Machine Learning (ML)--enabled systems is steadily increasing. Nevertheless, there is a shortage of ML-specific quality assurance approaches, possibly because of the limited knowledge of how quality-related concerns emerge and evolve in ML-enabled systems. Objective. We aim to investigate the emergence and evolution of specific types of quality-related concerns known as ML-specific code smells, i.e., sub-optimal implementation solutions applied on ML pipelines that may significantly decrease both the quality and maintainability of ML-enabled systems. More specifically, we present a plan to study ML-specific code smells by empirically analyzing (i) their prevalence in real ML-enabled systems, (ii) how they are introduced and removed, and (iii) their survivability. Method. We will conduct an exploratory study, mining a large dataset of ML-enabled systems and analyzing over 400k commits about 337 projects. We will track and inspect the introduction and evolution of ML smells through CodeSmile, a novel ML smell detector that we will build to enable our investigation and to detect ML-specific code smells.
Forward citations
Cited by 1 Pith paper
-
MLScent A tool for Anti-pattern detection in ML projects
MLScent reports 87.5% agreement, recall 0.875, and F1 0.933 for detecting ML anti-patterns on 72 expert-annotated samples from 7 projects, plus prevalence counts from 43 repositories.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.