Search arXiv⌕ Search
Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 1908.09321

Does Code Quality Affect Pull Request Acceptance? An empirical study

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

Abstract

Background. Pull requests are a common practice for contributing and reviewing contributions, and are employed both in open-source and industrial contexts. One of the main goals of code reviews is to find defects in the code, allowing project maintainers to easily integrate external contributions into a project and discuss the code contributions. Objective. The goal of this paper is to understand whether code quality is actually considered when pull requests are accepted. Specifically, we aim at understanding whether code quality issues such as code smells, antipatterns, and coding style violations in the pull request code affect the chance of its acceptance when reviewed by a maintainer of the project. Method. We conducted a case study among 28 Java open-source projects, analyzing the presence of 4.7 M code quality issues in 36 K pull requests. We analyzed further correlations by applying Logistic Regression and seven machine learning techniques (Decision Tree, Random Forest, Extremely Randomized Trees, AdaBoost, Gradient Boosting, XGBoost). Results. Unexpectedly, code quality turned out not to affect the acceptance of a pull request at all. As suggested by other works, other factors such as the reputation of the maintainer and the importance of the feature delivered might be more important than code quality in terms of pull request acceptance. Conclusions. Researchers already investigated the influence of the developers' reputation and the pull request acceptance. This is the first work investigating if quality of the code in pull requests affects the acceptance of the pull request or not. We recommend that researchers further investigate this topic to understand if different measures or different tools could provide some useful measures.

Explore related subjects

cs.SE

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Valentina Lenarduzzi, Vili Nikkola, Nyyti Saarimäki, Davide Taibi. 2019-08-25. Does Code Quality Affect Pull Request Acceptance? An empirical study. https://arxiv.org/abs/1908.09321

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

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

Enhancing the Non-Functional Quality Compliance of LLM-Generated Code through Quality-Aware Preference Learning

Large Language Models (LLMs) have been widely adopted in commercial code completion engines, significantly enhancing coding efficiency and productivity. However, even functionally correct LLM-generated code may exhibit non-functional quality issues that violate coding standards and best practices, such as poor style and limited maintainability. To address this, we propose a framework for quality-aware preference learning that guides LLMs toward generating criteria-compliant code. Our approach consists of three phases. First, we construct a dataset of paired criteria-violating and criteria-compliant samples, where each pair contains code exhibiting a specific non-functional quality issue and its repaired version that resolves the issue. Second, we design an adaptive token weighting mechanism to emphasize quality-sensitive code regions. Third, we introduce a hybrid optimization objective that combines ranking loss with language modeling loss and KL divergence to enable effective comparative optimization. Extensive experiments on DeepSeek-Coder and Qwen2.5-Coder show that our method substantially improves compliance with the targeted non-functional quality criteria while maintaining functional correctness, achieving a 75.7% relative increase in Quality Reciprocal Score (QRS) on MBPP-sanitized for Qwen2.5-Coder. Fine-tuning a 7B model requires less than three hours, indicating strong practical viability. Ablation studies and a user study further support the effectiveness of the proposed framework.

cs.SE↗
arXiv2026

ResTest: Targeted Coverage of Residual Not-Covered Code Using Large Language Models for Web GUI Testing

Automated web GUI testing (AWGT) approaches explore web applications through GUI actions to achieve code coverage. However, existing approaches, whether random-based, model-based, or reinforcement-learning-based, often struggle to generate continuous and semantically meaningful action sequences for testing complex functionalities, limiting their achievable code coverage. Recent LLM-based approaches partially alleviate this problem but still fall short due to limited capability in inferring testable functionalities and low success rates in executing tasks on complex web applications. In this paper, we propose ResTest, a complementary approach that uses coverage-report-guided LLMs to target residual not-covered code left by existing AWGT approaches. ResTest first runs an existing AWGT approach to broadly explore the application while constructing a state transition graph with summarized information. Once coverage plateaus, ResTest employs an LLM to infer not-covered functionalities based on the state transition graph and coverage report, and then utilizes a specialized LLM-driven GUI agent to execute these functionalities in a targeted manner. Our evaluation on ten open-source web applications shows that ResTest improves three categories of AWGT approaches by 17.52\% to 24.36\% in average code coverage. Ablation studies further confirm the sustained coverage improvement capability and the contribution of each component.

cs.SE↗
arXiv2026

Measuring and Exploiting Contextual Bias in LLM-Assisted Security Code Review

Automated Code Review (ACR) systems integrating Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly adopted in software development workflows, ranging from interactive assistants to autonomous agents in CI/CD pipelines. In this paper, we study how LLM-based vulnerability detection in ACR is affected by the framing effect: the tendency to let the presentation of information override its semantic content in forming judgments. We examine whether adversaries can exploit this through contextual-bias injection (crafting PR metadata to bias ACR security judgments) as a supply-chain attack vector against real-world ACR pipelines. To this end, we first conduct a large-scale exploratory study across 6 LLMs under five framing conditions, establishing the framing effect as a systematic and widespread phenomenon in LLM-based vulnerability detection. We then design a realistic and controlled experimental environment, evaluating 33 CVEs across 20 real-world projects and two popular ACR pipelines (Claude Code and CodeRabbit), to assess the susceptibility of real-world ACR pipelines to vulnerability re-introduction attacks. We employ two attack strategies: a template-based attack inspired by prior related work, and a novel LLM-assisted refinement attack. We find that template-based attacks are ineffective and may even backfire, as direct biasing attempts raise suspicions. Our refinement attack, on the other hand, is successful in 32/33 (97%) cases, exploiting a fundamental asymmetry: attackers can iteratively refine attacks against a local clone of the review pipeline, while defenders have only one chance to detect them. Overall, our findings highlight the dangers of over-relying on ACR and stress the importance of human oversight and contributor trust in the development process.

cs.SE↗