Leveraging the Crowd for Dependency Management: An Empirical Study on the Dependabot Compatibility Score

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2403.09012v1
• Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2024 00:26:19 GMT
• Title: Leveraging the Crowd for Dependency Management: An Empirical Study on the Dependabot Compatibility Score
• Authors: Benjamin Rombaut, Filipe R. Cogo, Ahmed E. Hassan,
• Abstract summary: We study the efficacy of the compatibility score to help client packages assess the risks involved with accepting a dependency update. We find that a compatibility score cannot be calculated for 83% of the dependency updates due to the lack of data from the crowd. We propose metrics that amplify the input from the crowd and demonstrate the ability of those metrics to predict the acceptance of a successful update by client packages.
• Score: 3.6840775431698893
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Dependabot, a popular dependency management tool, includes a compatibility score feature that helps client packages assess the risk of accepting a dependency update by leveraging knowledge from "the crowd". For each dependency update, Dependabot calculates this compatibility score as the proportion of successful updates performed by other client packages that use the same provider package as a dependency. In this paper, we study the efficacy of the compatibility score to help client packages assess the risks involved with accepting a dependency update. We analyze 579,206 pull requests opened by Dependabot to update a dependency, along with 618,045 compatibility score records calculated by Dependabot. We find that a compatibility score cannot be calculated for 83% of the dependency updates due to the lack of data from the crowd. Yet, the vast majority of the scores that can be calculated have a small confidence interval and are based on low-quality data, suggesting that client packages should have additional angles to evaluate the risk of an update and the trustworthiness of the compatibility score. To overcome these limitations, we propose metrics that amplify the input from the crowd and demonstrate the ability of those metrics to predict the acceptance of a successful update by client packages. We also demonstrate that historical update metrics from client packages can be used to provide a more personalized compatibility score. Based on our findings, we argue that, when leveraging the crowd, dependency management bots should include a confidence interval to help calibrate the trust clients can place in the compatibility score, and consider the quality of tests that exercise candidate updates.

Related papers

• Semiparametric conformal prediction [79.6147286161434]
  Risk-sensitive applications require well-calibrated prediction sets over multiple, potentially correlated target variables. We treat the scores as random vectors and aim to construct the prediction set accounting for their joint correlation structure. We report desired coverage and competitive efficiency on a range of real-world regression problems.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-11-04T14:29:02Z)
• FamiCom: Further Demystifying Prompts for Language Models with Task-Agnostic Performance Estimation [73.454943870226]
  Language models have shown impressive in-context-learning capabilities. We propose a measure called FamiCom, providing a more comprehensive measure for task-agnostic performance estimation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-17T06:14:55Z)
• Trusting code in the wild: Exploring contributor reputation measures to review dependencies in the Rust ecosystem [1.0310977366592338]
  We use network centrality measures to proxy contributor reputation using collaboration activity. We find that only 24% of respondents often review dependencies before adding or updating a package. We recommend that ecosystems like GitHub, Rust, and npm implement a contributor reputation badge to aid developers in dependency reviews.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-14T16:13:58Z)
• See to Believe: Using Visualization To Motivate Updating Third-party Dependencies [1.7914660044009358]
  Security vulnerabilities introduced by applications using third-party dependencies are on the increase. Developers are wary of library updates, even to fix vulnerabilities, citing that being unaware, or that the migration effort to update outweighs the decision. In this paper, we hypothesize that the dependency graph visualization (DGV) approach will motivate developers to update.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-15T03:57:27Z)
• Trust Driven On-Demand Scheme for Client Deployment in Federated Learning [39.9947471801304]
  "Trusted-On-Demand-FL" establishes a relationship of trust between the server and the pool of eligible clients. Our simulations rely on a continuous user behavior dataset, deploying an optimization model powered by a genetic algorithm.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-01T08:50:08Z)
• Characterizing Dependency Update Practice of NPM, PyPI and Cargo Packages [7.739923421146855]
  Keeping dependencies up-to-date prevents software supply chain attacks through outdated and vulnerable dependencies. We propose two update metrics to measure the updatedness of dependencies and updatedness of vulnerable dependencies. We conduct a large-scale empirical study of update metrics with 2.9M packages, 66.8M package versions, and 26.8M unique package-dependency relations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-03-26T05:01:53Z)
• Towards Fair, Robust and Efficient Client Contribution Evaluation in Federated Learning [16.543724155324938]
  We introduce a novel method called Fair, Robust, and Efficient Client Assessment (FRECA) for quantifying client contributions in Federated Learning (FL) FRECA employs a framework called FedTruth to estimate the global model's ground truth update, balancing contributions from all clients while filtering out impacts from malicious ones. Our experimental results show that FRECA can accurately and efficiently quantify client contributions in a robust manner.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-06T21:07:12Z)
• Binary Classification with Confidence Difference [100.08818204756093]
  This paper delves into a novel weakly supervised binary classification problem called confidence-difference (ConfDiff) classification. We propose a risk-consistent approach to tackle this problem and show that the estimation error bound the optimal convergence rate. We also introduce a risk correction approach to mitigate overfitting problems, whose consistency and convergence rate are also proven.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-09T11:44:50Z)
• Bring Your Own Data! Self-Supervised Evaluation for Large Language Models [52.15056231665816]
  We propose a framework for self-supervised evaluation of Large Language Models (LLMs) We demonstrate self-supervised evaluation strategies for measuring closed-book knowledge, toxicity, and long-range context dependence. We find strong correlations between self-supervised and human-supervised evaluations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-06-23T17:59:09Z)
• Robust Quantity-Aware Aggregation for Federated Learning [72.59915691824624]
  Malicious clients can poison model updates and claim large quantities to amplify the impact of their model updates in the model aggregation. Existing defense methods for FL, while all handling malicious model updates, either treat all quantities benign or simply ignore/truncate the quantities of all clients. We propose a robust quantity-aware aggregation algorithm for federated learning, called FedRA, to perform the aggregation with awareness of local data quantities.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-05-22T15:13:23Z)
• Personalized multi-faceted trust modeling to determine trust links in social media and its potential for misinformation management [61.88858330222619]
  We present an approach for predicting trust links between peers in social media. We propose a data-driven multi-faceted trust modeling which incorporates many distinct features for a comprehensive analysis. Illustrated in a trust-aware item recommendation task, we evaluate the proposed framework in the context of a large Yelp dataset.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-11-11T19:40:51Z)
• REAM$\sharp$: An Enhancement Approach to Reference-based Evaluation Metrics for Open-domain Dialog Generation [63.46331073232526]
  We present an enhancement approach to Reference-based EvAluation Metrics for open-domain dialogue systems. A prediction model is designed to estimate the reliability of the given reference set. We show how its predicted results can be helpful to augment the reference set, and thus improve the reliability of the metric.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-05-30T10:04:13Z)
• Surveys without Questions: A Reinforcement Learning Approach [12.044303977550229]
  We develop an approach based on Reinforcement Learning (RL) to extract proxy ratings from clickstream data. We introduce two new metrics to represent ratings - one, customer-level and the other, aggregate-level for click actions across customers.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-06-11T10:41:07Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.