mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Towards a Change Taxonomy for Machine Learning Systems

arXiv 2203.11365 ↗First posted 21 Mar 2022cs.SE cs.AIcited by 6

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Machine Learning (ML) research publications commonly provide open-source implementations on GitHub, allowing their audience to replicate, validate, or even extend machine learning algorithms, data sets, and metadata. However, thus far little is known about the degree of collaboration activity happening on such ML research repositories, in particular regarding (1) the degree to which such repositories receive contributions from forks, (2) the nature of such contributions (i.e., the types of changes), and (3) the nature of changes that are not contributed back to forks, which might represent missed opportunities. In this paper, we empirically study contributions to 1,346 ML research repositories and their 67,369 forks, both quantitatively and qualitatively (by building on Hindle et al.'s seminal taxonomy of code changes). We found that while ML research repositories are heavily forked, only 9% of the forks made modifications to the forked repository. 42% of the latter sent changes to the parent repositories, half of which (52%) were accepted by the parent repositories. Our qualitative analysis on 539 contributed and 378 local (fork-only) changes, extends Hindle et al.'s taxonomy with one new top-level change category related to ML (Data), and 15 new sub-categories, including nine ML-specific ones (input data, output data, program data, sharing, change evaluation, parameter tuning, performance, pre-processing, model training). While the changes that are not contributed back by the forks mostly concern domain-specific customizations and local experimentation (e.g., parameter tuning), the origin ML repositories do miss out on a non-negligible 15.4% of Documentation changes, 13.6% of Feature changes and 11.4% of Bug fix changes. The findings in this paper will be useful for practitioners, researchers, toolsmiths, and educators.

Key facts. Cited by 6 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 14 of its 69 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 21 Mar 2022.

Builds on

14 of 69 references.

References · 14

  1. 2021Software Engineering for AI-Based Systems: A Surveycited by 68
  2. 2021Collaboration Challenges in Building ML-Enabled Systems: Communication, Documentation, Engineering, and Processcited by 56
  3. 2018Software Engineering Challenges of Deep Learningcited by 41
  4. 2018Identifying Implementation Bugs in Machine Learning based Image Classifiers using Metamorphic Testingcited by 30
  5. 2018What's in a GitHub Star? Understanding Repository Starring Practices in a Social Coding Platformcited by 25
  6. 2019Studying Software Engineering Patterns for Designing Machine Learning Systemscited by 24
  7. 2017An Empirical Comparison of Dependency Network Evolution in Seven Software Packaging Ecosystemscited by 20
  8. 2019Better Code, Better Sharing:On the Need of Analyzing Jupyter Notebookscited by 13
  9. 2020Detecting and Understanding Real-World Differential Performance Bugs in Machine Learning Librariescited by 7
  10. 2021Asset Management in Machine Learning: A Surveycited by 7
  11. 2020What Makes a Popular Academic AI Repository?cited by 6
  12. 2014Coding Together at Scale: GitHub as a Collaborative Social Networkcited by 5
2 more
  1. 2018An Insight into the Pull Requests of GitHubcited by 4
  2. 2020Which Pull Requests Get Accepted and Why? A study of popular NPM Packagescited by 1

Built on by

Cited by year

Citing papers per year: 2023: 1; 2024: 2; 2025: 3.

6 papers.