mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Ghost Echoes Revealed: Benchmarking Maintainability Metrics and Machine Learning Predictions Against Human Assessments

arXiv 2408.10754 ↗First posted 20 Aug 2024cs.SEcited by 1

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

As generative AI is expected to increase global code volumes, the importance of maintainability from a human perspective will become even greater. Various methods have been developed to identify the most important maintainability issues, including aggregated metrics and advanced Machine Learning (ML) models. This study benchmarks several maintainability prediction approaches, including State-of-the-Art (SotA) ML, SonarQube's Maintainability Rating, CodeScene's Code Health, and Microsoft's Maintainability Index. Our results indicate that CodeScene matches the accuracy of SotA ML and outperforms the average human expert. Importantly, unlike SotA ML, CodeScene also provides end users with actionable code smell details to remedy identified issues. Finally, caution is advised with SonarQube due to its tendency to generate many false positives. Unfortunately, our findings call into question the validity of previous studies that solely relied on SonarQube output for establishing ground truth labels. To improve reliability in future maintainability and technical debt studies, we recommend employing more accurate metrics. Moreover, reevaluating previous findings with Code Health would mitigate this revealed validity threat.

Key facts. Cited by 1 paper in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). First posted on arXiv 20 Aug 2024.

Builds on

No reference list yet.

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2026: 1.

1 paper.