The Technical Debt Dataset
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Technical Debt analysis is increasing in popularity as nowadays researchers and industry are adopting various tools for static code analysis to evaluate the quality of their code. Despite this, empirical studies on software projects are expensive because of the time needed to analyze the projects. In addition, the results are difficult to compare as studies commonly consider different projects. In this work, we propose the Technical Debt Dataset, a curated set of project measurement data from 33 Java projects from the Apache Software Foundation. In the Technical Debt Dataset, we analyzed all commits from separately defined time frames with SonarQube to collect Technical Debt information and with Ptidej to detect code smells. Moreover, we extracted all available commit information from the git logs, the refactoring applied with Refactoring Miner, and fault information reported in the issue trackers (Jira). Using this information, we executed the SZZ algorithm to identify the fault-inducing and -fixing commits. We analyzed 78K commits from the selected 33 projects, detecting 1.8M SonarQube issues, 38K code smells, 28K faults and 57K refactorings. The project analysis took more than 200 days. In this paper, we describe the data retrieval pipeline together with the tools used for the analysis. The dataset is made available through CSV files and an SQLite database to facilitate queries on the data. The Technical Debt Dataset aims to open up diverse opportunities for Technical Debt research, enabling researchers to compare results on common projects.
Key facts. Cited by 6 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). First posted on arXiv 2 Aug 2019.
Builds on
No reference list yet.
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2021: 1; 2022: 0; 2023: 2; 2024: 1; 2025: 2.
6 papers.
- 2024How Propense Are Large Language Models at Producing Code Smells? A Benchmarking Studycited by 6
- 2021End to End Software Engineering Researchcited by 2
- 2023PENTACET data -- 23 Million Contextual Code Comments and 250,000 SATD commentscited by 2
- 2023A systematic literature review on the code smells datasets and validation mechanismscited by 2
- 2025SQuaD: The Software Quality Datasetcited by 1
- 2025TD-Suite: All Batteries Included Framework for Technical Debt Classificationcited by 0
- 2025SQuaD: The Software Quality Dataset14 Nov 2025
- 2025TD-Suite: All Batteries Included Framework for Technical Debt Classification15 Apr 2025
- 2024How Propense Are Large Language Models at Producing Code Smells? A Benchmarking Study25 Dec 2024
- 2023A systematic literature review on the code smells datasets and validation mechanisms2 Jun 2023
- 2023PENTACET data -- 23 Million Contextual Code Comments and 250,000 SATD comments24 Mar 2023
- 2021End to End Software Engineering Research22 Dec 2021