How Do Model Export Formats Impact the Development of ML-Enabled Systems? A Case Study on Model Integration
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Machine learning (ML) models are often integrated into ML-enabled systems to provide software functionality that would otherwise be impossible. This integration requires the selection of an appropriate ML model export format, for which many options are available. These formats are crucial for ensuring a seamless integration, and choosing a suboptimal one can negatively impact system development. However, little evidence is available to guide practitioners during the export format selection. We therefore evaluated various model export formats regarding their impact on the development of ML-enabled systems from an integration perspective. Based on the results of a preliminary questionnaire survey (n=17), we designed an extensive embedded case study with two ML-enabled systems in three versions with different technologies. We then analyzed the effect of five popular export formats, namely ONNX, Pickle, TensorFlow's SavedModel, PyTorch's TorchScript, and Joblib. In total, we studied 30 units of analysis (2 systems x 3 tech stacks x 5 formats) and collected data via structured field notes. The holistic qualitative analysis of the results indicated that ONNX offered the most efficient integration and portability across most cases. SavedModel and TorchScript were very convenient to use in Python-based systems, but otherwise required workarounds (TorchScript more than SavedModel). SavedModel also allowed the easy incorporation of preprocessing logic into a single file, which made it scalable for complex deep learning use cases. Pickle and Joblib were the most challenging to integrate, even in Python-based systems. Regarding technical support, all model export formats had strong technical documentation and strong community support across platforms such as Stack Overflow and Reddit. Practitioners can use our findings to inform the selection of ML export formats suited to their context.
Key facts. Cited by 1 paper in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 12 of its 46 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 1 Feb 2025.
Builds on
12 of 46 references.
References · 12
- 2017TensorFlow-Serving: Flexible, High-Performance ML Servingcited by 85
- 2021Software Engineering for AI-Based Systems: A Surveycited by 68
- 2020Engineering AI Systems: A Research Agendacited by 37
- 2020A Software Engineering Perspective on Engineering Machine Learning Systems: State of the Art and Challengescited by 33
- 2021Characterizing Technical Debt and Antipatterns in AI-Based Systems: A Systematic Mapping Studycited by 21
- 2021Characterizing and Detecting Mismatch in Machine-Learning-Enabled Systemscited by 19
- 2021Adapting Software Architectures to Machine Learning Challengescited by 11
- 2023Challenges and Practices of Deep Learning Model Reengineering: A Case Study on Computer Visioncited by 11
- 2024Green AI: A Preliminary Empirical Study on Energy Consumption in DL Models Across Different Runtime Infrastructurescited by 11
- 2023The Product Beyond the Model -- An Empirical Study of Repositories of Open-Source ML Productscited by 10
- 2024Reusing Deep Learning Models: Challenges and Directions in Software Engineeringcited by 10
- 2024A Large-Scale Study of Model Integration in ML-Enabled Software Systemscited by 6
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2026: 1.
1 paper.