Guardado en:
| Autores principales: | , , |
|---|---|
| Formato: | Preprint |
| Publicado: |
2026
|
| Materias: | |
| Acceso en línea: | https://arxiv.org/abs/2606.01882 |
| Etiquetas: |
Agregar Etiqueta
Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!
|
| _version_ | 1866913178223378432 |
|---|---|
| author | Agh, Halimeh Cimendag, Betül Wagner, Stefan |
| author_facet | Agh, Halimeh Cimendag, Betül Wagner, Stefan |
| contents | Machine learning systems consist of general-purpose code as well as machine-learning-specific code. While ML-specific code smells have been identified, their connection to project characteristics and their interaction with overall code quality are not well understood. Without this knowledge, quality assurance strategies remain one-size-fits-all, failing to account for the contextual factors that drive technical debt in ML systems. We present empirical evidence by examining how six project features (size, age, contributors, commit frequency, CI/CD adoption, and domain) relate to both ML-specific and general Python code quality in 279 open-source ML projects on GitHub. Using CodeSmile for ML code smells and Pylint for general Python smells, our results show: (1) ML code smells are 41-94 times less frequent than general Python smells; (2) commit frequency and domain are significantly associated with ML-specific quality, while project size, team size, age, and CI/CD adoption are not, challenging traditional views on technical debt; (3) general Python smells are not linked to any project characteristic, indicating systemic coding issues that are independent of project context; (4) domains that suffer most from ML-specific smells are not necessarily the same domains that suffer most from general Python smells, necessitating tailored quality strategies for each smell type. MLOps often involves configuration issues, Reinforcement Learning faces challenges with tensor manipulation, and Computer Vision encounters problems with GPU workflows. Overall, ML code quality depends on domain-specific practices and specialized CI/CD quality gates, as standard automation often overlooks domain-specific correctness problems. |
| format | Preprint |
| id |
arxiv_https___arxiv_org_abs_2606_01882 |
| institution | arXiv |
| publishDate | 2026 |
| record_format | arxiv |
| spellingShingle | Comparing ML-Specific and General Python Code Smells Across Project Characteristics Agh, Halimeh Cimendag, Betül Wagner, Stefan Software Engineering Machine learning systems consist of general-purpose code as well as machine-learning-specific code. While ML-specific code smells have been identified, their connection to project characteristics and their interaction with overall code quality are not well understood. Without this knowledge, quality assurance strategies remain one-size-fits-all, failing to account for the contextual factors that drive technical debt in ML systems. We present empirical evidence by examining how six project features (size, age, contributors, commit frequency, CI/CD adoption, and domain) relate to both ML-specific and general Python code quality in 279 open-source ML projects on GitHub. Using CodeSmile for ML code smells and Pylint for general Python smells, our results show: (1) ML code smells are 41-94 times less frequent than general Python smells; (2) commit frequency and domain are significantly associated with ML-specific quality, while project size, team size, age, and CI/CD adoption are not, challenging traditional views on technical debt; (3) general Python smells are not linked to any project characteristic, indicating systemic coding issues that are independent of project context; (4) domains that suffer most from ML-specific smells are not necessarily the same domains that suffer most from general Python smells, necessitating tailored quality strategies for each smell type. MLOps often involves configuration issues, Reinforcement Learning faces challenges with tensor manipulation, and Computer Vision encounters problems with GPU workflows. Overall, ML code quality depends on domain-specific practices and specialized CI/CD quality gates, as standard automation often overlooks domain-specific correctness problems. |
| title | Comparing ML-Specific and General Python Code Smells Across Project Characteristics |
| topic | Software Engineering |
| url | https://arxiv.org/abs/2606.01882 |