mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Retrieving and Ranking Relevant JavaScript Technologies from Web Repositories

arXiv 2205.15086 ↗First posted 30 May 2022cs.SE cs.IR cs.LGcited by 0

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

The selection of software technologies is an important but complex task. We consider developers of JavaScript (JS) applications, for whom the assessment of JS libraries has become difficult and time-consuming due to the growing number of technology options available. A common strategy is to browse software repositories via search engines (e.g., NPM, or Google), although it brings some problems. First, given a technology need, the engines might return a long list of results, which often causes information overload issues. Second, the results should be ranked according to criteria of interest for the developer. However, deciding how to weight these criteria to make a decision is not straightforward. In this work, we propose a two-phase approach for assisting developers to retrieve and rank JS technologies in a semi-automated fashion. The first-phase (ST-Retrieval) uses a meta-search technique for collecting JS technologies that meet the developer's needs. The second-phase (called ST-Rank), relies on a machine learning technique to infer, based on criteria used by other projects in the Web, a ranking of the output of ST-Retrieval. We evaluated our approach with NPM and obtained satisfactory results in terms of the accuracy of the technologies retrieved and the order in which they were ranked.

Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 2 of its 44 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 30 May 2022.

Builds on

2 of 44 references.

References · 2

  1. 2014Evaluating the retrieval effectiveness of Web search engines using a representative query samplecited by 3
  2. 2015What Users See - Structures in Search Engine Results Pagescited by 3

Built on by

Not cited yet.