GitRanking: A Ranking of GitHub Topics for Software Classification using Active Sampling

May 19, 2022 Β· Declared Dead Β· πŸ› Software, Practice & Experience

πŸ‘» CAUSE OF DEATH: Ghosted
No code link whatsoever

"No code URL or promise found in abstract"

Evidence collected by the PWNC Scanner

Authors Cezar Sas, Andrea Capiluppi, Claudio Di Sipio, Juri Di Rocco, Davide Di Ruscio arXiv ID 2205.09379 Category cs.SE: Software Engineering Cross-listed cs.IR, cs.LG Citations 11 Venue Software, Practice & Experience Last Checked 4 months ago
Abstract
GitHub is the world's largest host of source code, with more than 150M repositories. However, most of these repositories are not labeled or inadequately so, making it harder for users to find relevant projects. There have been various proposals for software application domain classification over the past years. However, these approaches lack a well-defined taxonomy that is hierarchical, grounded in a knowledge base, and free of irrelevant terms. This work proposes GitRanking, a framework for creating a classification ranked into discrete levels based on how general or specific their meaning is. We collected 121K topics from GitHub and considered $60\%$ of the most frequent ones for the ranking. GitRanking 1) uses active sampling to ensure a minimal number of required annotations; and 2) links each topic to Wikidata, reducing ambiguities and improving the reusability of the taxonomy. Our results show that developers, when annotating their projects, avoid using terms with a high degree of specificity. This makes the finding and discovery of their projects more challenging for other users. Furthermore, we show that GitRanking can effectively rank terms according to their general or specific meaning. This ranking would be an essential asset for developers to build upon, allowing them to complement their annotations with more precise topics. Finally, we show that GitRanking is a dynamically extensible method: it can currently accept further terms to be ranked with a minimum number of annotations ($\sim$ 15). This paper is the first collective attempt to build a ground-up taxonomy of software domains.
Community shame:
Not yet rated
Community Contributions

Found the code? Know the venue? Think something is wrong? Let us know!

πŸ“œ Similar Papers

In the same crypt β€” Software Engineering

Died the same way β€” πŸ‘» Ghosted