Search arXiv⌕ Search
Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 1908.00827

The Technical Debt Dataset

Valentina Lenarduzzi·Nyyti Saarimäki·Davide Taibi
View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Technical Debt analysis is increasing in popularity as nowadays researchers and industry are adopting various tools for static code analysis to evaluate the quality of their code. Despite this, empirical studies on software projects are expensive because of the time needed to analyze the projects. In addition, the results are difficult to compare as studies commonly consider different projects. In this work, we propose the Technical Debt Dataset, a curated set of project measurement data from 33 Java projects from the Apache Software Foundation. In the Technical Debt Dataset, we analyzed all commits from separately defined time frames with SonarQube to collect Technical Debt information and with Ptidej to detect code smells. Moreover, we extracted all available commit information from the git logs, the refactoring applied with Refactoring Miner, and fault information reported in the issue trackers (Jira). Using this information, we executed the SZZ algorithm to identify the fault-inducing and -fixing commits. We analyzed 78K commits from the selected 33 projects, detecting 1.8M SonarQube issues, 38K code smells, 28K faults and 57K refactorings. The project analysis took more than 200 days. In this paper, we describe the data retrieval pipeline together with the tools used for the analysis. The dataset is made available through CSV files and an SQLite database to facilitate queries on the data. The Technical Debt Dataset aims to open up diverse opportunities for Technical Debt research, enabling researchers to compare results on common projects.

Explore related subjects

cs.SE

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Valentina Lenarduzzi, Nyyti Saarimäki, Davide Taibi. 2019-08-02. The Technical Debt Dataset. https://doi.org/10.1145/3345629.3345630

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

Combining Type Inference and Automated Unit Test Generation for Python

Automated unit test generation is an established research field that has so far focused on statically-typed programming languages. The lack of type information in dynamically-typed programming languages, such as Python, inhibits test generators, which heavily rely on information about parameter and return types of functions to select suitable arguments when constructing test cases. Since automated test generators inherently rely on frequent execution of candidate tests, we make use of these frequent executions to address this problem by introducing type tracing, which extracts type-related information during execution and gradually refines the available type information. We implement type tracing as an extension of the Pynguin test-generation framework for Python, allowing it (i) to infer parameter types by observing how parameters are used during runtime, (ii) to record the types of values that function calls return, and (iii) to use this type information to increase code coverage. The approach leads to up to 87.8 % more branch coverage, improved mutation scores, and to type information of similar quality to that produced by other state-of-the-art type-inference tools.

cs.SE↗
arXiv2026

MigrateLib: a tool for end-to-end Python library migration

Library migration is the process of replacing a library with a similar one in a software project. Manual library migration is time consuming and error prone, as it requires developers to understand the Application Programming Interfaces (API) of both libraries, map equivalent APIs, and perform the necessary code transformations. Due to the difficulty of the library migration process, most of the existing automated techniques and tooling stop at the API mapping stage or support a limited set of libraries and code transformations. In this paper, we develop an end-to-end solution that can automatically migrate code between any arbitrary pair of Python libraries that provide similar functionality. Due to the promising capabilities of Large Language Models (LLMs) in code generation and transformation, we use LLMs as the primary engine for migration. Before building the tool, we first study the capabilities of LLMs for library migration on a benchmark of 321 real-world library migrations. We find that LLMs can effectively perform library migration, but some post-processing steps can further improve the performance. Based on this, we develop MigrateLib, a command line application that combines the power of LLMs, static analysis, and dynamic analysis to provide accurate library migration. We evaluate MigrateLib on 717 real-world Python applications that are not from our benchmark. We find that MigrateLib can migrate 32% of the migrations with complete correctness. Of the remaining migrations, only 14% of the migration-related changes are left for developers to fix for more than half of the projects.

cs.SE↗
arXiv2026

Constraint Decay: The Fragility of LLM Agents in Backend Code Generation

Large Language Model (LLM) agents demonstrate strong performance in autonomous code generation under loose specifications. However, production-grade software requires strict adherence to structural constraints, such as architectural patterns, databases, and object-relational mappings. Existing benchmarks often overlook these non-functional requirements, rewarding functionally correct but structurally arbitrary solutions. We present a systematic study evaluating how well agents handle structural constraints in multi-file backend generation. By fixing a unified API contract across 80 greenfield generation tasks and 20 feature-implementation tasks spanning eight web frameworks, we isolate the effect of structural complexity using a dual evaluation with end-to-end behavioral tests and static verifiers. Our findings reveal a phenomenon of constraint decay: as structural requirements accumulate, agent performance exhibits a substantial decline. Evaluated configurations lose 27.28 points on average in assertion pass rates from baseline to fully specified tasks. Framework sensitivity analysis exposes performance disparities: mid-tier models succeed in minimal, explicit frameworks (e.g., Flask) but perform substantially worse on average in convention-heavy environments (e.g., FastAPI, Django). Finally, error analysis identifies data-layer defects (e.g., incorrect query composition and ORM runtime violations) as the leading root causes. This work highlights that jointly satisfying functional and structural requirements remains a key open challenge for coding agents.

cs.SE↗