One Documentation Does Not Fit All: Case Study of TensorFlow Documentation

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2505.01939v1
• Date: Sat, 03 May 2025 22:22:00 GMT
• Title: One Documentation Does Not Fit All: Case Study of TensorFlow Documentation
• Authors: Sharuka Promodya Thirimanne, Elim Yoseph Lemango, Giulio Antoniol, Maleknaz Nayebi,
• Abstract summary: This study examined trends in tutorials and artifacts compared to analyze these artifacts to understand the types of questions and the backgrounds of the developers asking them.<n>Our findings showed no significant differences in the content or the nature of the questions across different tutorials.<n>Our results show that 24.9% of the questions concern errors and exceptions, while 64.3% relate to inadequate and non-generalizable examples in the documentation.
• Score: 2.0749231618270803
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Software documentation guides the proper use of tools or services. With the rapid growth of machine learning libraries, individuals from various fields are incorporating machine learning into their workflows through programming. However, many of these users lack software engineering experience, affecting the usability of the documentation. Traditionally, software developers have created documentation primarily for their peers, making it challenging for others to interpret and effectively use these resources. Moreover, no study has specifically focused on machine learning software documentation or analyzing the backgrounds of developers who rely on such documentation, highlighting a critical gap in understanding how to make these resources more accessible. This study examined customization trends in TensorFlow tutorials and compared these artifacts to analyze content and design differences. We also analyzed Stack Overflow questions related to TensorFlow documentation to understand the types of questions and the backgrounds of the developers asking them. Further, we developed two taxonomies based on the nature and triggers of the questions for machine learning software. Our findings showed no significant differences in the content or the nature of the questions across different tutorials. Our results show that 24.9% of the questions concern errors and exceptions, while 64.3% relate to inadequate and non-generalizable examples in the documentation. Despite efforts to create customized documentation, our analysis indicates that current TensorFlow documentation does not effectively support its target users.

Related papers

• A Comparative Survey of PyTorch vs TensorFlow for Deep Learning: Usability, Performance, and Deployment Trade-offs [0.0]
  We review each framework's programming paradigm and developer experience, contrasting PyTorch's graph-based approach with PyTorch's dynamic, Pythonic style.<n>We compare model training speeds and inference performance across multiple tasks and data regimes, drawing on recent benchmarks and studies.<n>Our findings indicate that while both frameworks are highly capable for state-of-the-art deep learning, they exhibit distinct trade-offs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-08-06T02:55:57Z)
• Paper2Code: Automating Code Generation from Scientific Papers in Machine Learning [57.09163579304332]
  We introduce PaperCoder, a framework that transforms machine learning papers into functional code repositories.<n>PaperCoder operates in three stages: planning, designs the system architecture with diagrams, identifies file dependencies, and generates configuration files.<n>We then evaluate PaperCoder on generating code implementations from machine learning papers based on both model-based and human evaluations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-04-24T01:57:01Z)
• The Software Documentor Mindset [10.55519622264761]
  We interviewed 26 volunteer documentation contributors, i.e. documentors, to understand why and how they create such documentation.<n>We identified sixteen considerations that documentors have during the documentation contribution process, along three dimensions, namely motivations, topic selection techniques, and styling objectives.<n>We propose a structure of mindsets, and their associated considerations across the three dimensions, as a framework for reasoning about the documentation contribution process.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-12-12T16:28:08Z)
• Understanding Documentation Use Through Log Analysis: An Exploratory Case Study of Four Cloud Services [14.104545948572836]
  We analyze documentation page-view logs from four cloud-based industrial services. By analyzing page-view logs for over 100,000 users, we find diverse patterns of documentation page visits. We propose documentation page-view log analysis as a feasible technique for design audits of documentation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-16T20:37:29Z)
• PyRCA: A Library for Metric-based Root Cause Analysis [66.72542200701807]
  PyRCA is an open-source machine learning library of Root Cause Analysis (RCA) for Artificial Intelligence for IT Operations (AIOps) It provides a holistic framework to uncover the complicated metric causal dependencies and automatically locate root causes of incidents.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-06-20T09:55:10Z)
• A Study of Documentation for Software Architecture [7.011803832284996]
  We asked 65 participants to answer software architecture understanding questions. Answers to questions that require applying and creating activities were statistically significantly associated with the use of the system's source code. We conclude that, in the limited experimental context studied, our results contradict the hypothesis that the format of architectural documentation matters.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-26T22:14:53Z)
• Same or Different? Diff-Vectors for Authorship Analysis [78.83284164605473]
  In classic'' authorship analysis a feature vector represents a document, the value of a feature represents (an increasing function of) the relative frequency of the feature in the document, and the class label represents the author of the document. Our experiments tackle same-author verification, authorship verification, and closed-set authorship attribution; while DVs are naturally geared for solving the 1st, we also provide two novel methods for solving the 2nd and 3rd.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-01-24T08:48:12Z)
• AI Explainability 360: Impact and Design [120.95633114160688]
  In 2019, we created AI Explainability 360 (Arya et al. 2020), an open source software toolkit featuring ten diverse and state-of-the-art explainability methods. This paper examines the impact of the toolkit with several case studies, statistics, and community feedback. The paper also describes the flexible design of the toolkit, examples of its use, and the significant educational material and documentation available to its users.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-09-24T19:17:09Z)
• ProtoTransformer: A Meta-Learning Approach to Providing Student Feedback [54.142719510638614]
  In this paper, we frame the problem of providing feedback as few-shot classification. A meta-learner adapts to give feedback to student code on a new programming question from just a few examples by instructors. Our approach was successfully deployed to deliver feedback to 16,000 student exam-solutions in a programming course offered by a tier 1 university.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-07-23T22:41:28Z)
• Combining Feature and Instance Attribution to Detect Artifacts [62.63504976810927]
  We propose methods to facilitate identification of training data artifacts. We show that this proposed training-feature attribution approach can be used to uncover artifacts in training data. We execute a small user study to evaluate whether these methods are useful to NLP researchers in practice.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-07-01T09:26:13Z)
• KILT: a Benchmark for Knowledge Intensive Language Tasks [102.33046195554886]
  We present a benchmark for knowledge-intensive language tasks (KILT) All tasks in KILT are grounded in the same snapshot of Wikipedia. We find that a shared dense vector index coupled with a seq2seq model is a strong baseline.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-09-04T15:32:19Z)
• Documentation of Machine Learning Software [7.154621689269006]
  Machine learning software documentation is different from most of the documentations that were studied in software engineering research. Our ultimate goal is automated generation and adaptation of machine learning software documents for users with different levels of expertise. We will investigate the Stack Overflow Q/As and classify the documentation related Q/As within the machine learning domain.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-01-30T00:01:28Z)

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.