-
An empirical study of testing machine learning in the wild
Authors:
Moses Openja,
Foutse Khomh,
Armstrong Foundjem,
Zhen Ming,
Jiang,
Mouna Abidi,
Ahmed E. Hassan
Abstract:
Recently, machine and deep learning (ML/DL) algorithms have been increasingly adopted in many software systems. Due to their inductive nature, ensuring the quality of these systems remains a significant challenge for the research community. Unlike traditional software built deductively by writing explicit rules, ML/DL systems infer rules from training data. Recent research in ML/DL quality assuran…
▽ More
Recently, machine and deep learning (ML/DL) algorithms have been increasingly adopted in many software systems. Due to their inductive nature, ensuring the quality of these systems remains a significant challenge for the research community. Unlike traditional software built deductively by writing explicit rules, ML/DL systems infer rules from training data. Recent research in ML/DL quality assurance has adapted concepts from traditional software testing, such as mutation testing, to improve reliability. However, it is unclear if these proposed testing techniques are adopted in practice, or if new testing strategies have emerged from real-world ML deployments. There is little empirical evidence about the testing strategies.
To fill this gap, we perform the first fine-grained empirical study on ML testing in the wild to identify the ML properties being tested, the testing strategies, and their implementation throughout the ML workflow.
We conducted a mixed-methods study to understand ML software testing practices. We analyzed test files and cases from 11 open-source ML/DL projects on GitHub. Using open coding, we manually examined the testing strategies, tested ML properties, and implemented testing methods to understand their practical application in building and releasing ML/DL software systems.
Our findings reveal several key insights: 1.) The most common testing strategies, accounting for less than 40%, are Grey-box and White-box methods, such as Negative Testing, Oracle Approximation and Statistical Testing. 2.) A wide range of 17 ML properties are tested, out of which only 20% to 30% are frequently tested, including Consistency, Correctness}, and Efficiency. 3.) Bias and Fairness is more tested in Recommendation, while Security & Privacy is tested in Computer Vision (CV) systems, Application Platforms, and Natural Language Processing (NLP) systems.
△ Less
Submitted 13 July, 2024; v1 submitted 19 December, 2023;
originally announced December 2023.
-
Detection and Evaluation of bias-inducing Features in Machine learning
Authors:
Moses Openja,
Gabriel Laberge,
Foutse Khomh
Abstract:
The cause-to-effect analysis can help us decompose all the likely causes of a problem, such as an undesirable business situation or unintended harm to the individual(s). This implies that we can identify how the problems are inherited, rank the causes to help prioritize fixes, simplify a complex problem and visualize them. In the context of machine learning (ML), one can use cause-to-effect analys…
▽ More
The cause-to-effect analysis can help us decompose all the likely causes of a problem, such as an undesirable business situation or unintended harm to the individual(s). This implies that we can identify how the problems are inherited, rank the causes to help prioritize fixes, simplify a complex problem and visualize them. In the context of machine learning (ML), one can use cause-to-effect analysis to understand the reason for the biased behavior of the system. For example, we can examine the root causes of biases by checking each feature for a potential cause of bias in the model. To approach this, one can apply small changes to a given feature or a pair of features in the data, following some guidelines and observing how it impacts the decision made by the model (i.e., model prediction). Therefore, we can use cause-to-effect analysis to identify the potential bias-inducing features, even when these features are originally are unknown. This is important since most current methods require a pre-identification of sensitive features for bias assessment and can actually miss other relevant bias-inducing features, which is why systematic identification of such features is necessary. Moreover, it often occurs that to achieve an equitable outcome, one has to take into account sensitive features in the model decision. Therefore, it should be up to the domain experts to decide based on their knowledge of the context of a decision whether bias induced by specific features is acceptable or not. In this study, we propose an approach for systematically identifying all bias-inducing features of a model to help support the decision-making of domain experts. We evaluated our technique using four well-known datasets to showcase how our contribution can help spearhead the standard procedure when developing, testing, maintaining, and deploying fair/equitable machine learning systems.
△ Less
Submitted 19 October, 2023;
originally announced October 2023.
-
An Empirical Study on the Usage of Automated Machine Learning Tools
Authors:
Forough Majidi,
Moses Openja,
Foutse Khomh,
Heng Li
Abstract:
The popularity of automated machine learning (AutoML) tools in different domains has increased over the past few years. Machine learning (ML) practitioners use AutoML tools to automate and optimize the process of feature engineering, model training, and hyperparameter optimization and so on. Recent work performed qualitative studies on practitioners' experiences of using AutoML tools and compared…
▽ More
The popularity of automated machine learning (AutoML) tools in different domains has increased over the past few years. Machine learning (ML) practitioners use AutoML tools to automate and optimize the process of feature engineering, model training, and hyperparameter optimization and so on. Recent work performed qualitative studies on practitioners' experiences of using AutoML tools and compared different AutoML tools based on their performance and provided features, but none of the existing work studied the practices of using AutoML tools in real-world projects at a large scale. Therefore, we conducted an empirical study to understand how ML practitioners use AutoML tools in their projects. To this end, we examined the top 10 most used AutoML tools and their respective usages in a large number of open-source project repositories hosted on GitHub. The results of our study show 1) which AutoML tools are mostly used by ML practitioners and 2) the characteristics of the repositories that use these AutoML tools. Also, we identified the purpose of using AutoML tools (e.g. model parameter sampling, search space management, model evaluation/error-analysis, Data/ feature transformation, and data labeling) and the stages of the ML pipeline (e.g. feature engineering) where AutoML tools are used. Finally, we report how often AutoML tools are used together in the same source code files. We hope our results can help ML practitioners learn about different AutoML tools and their usages, so that they can pick the right tool for their purposes. Besides, AutoML tool developers can benefit from our findings to gain insight into the usages of their tools and improve their tools to better fit the users' usages and needs.
△ Less
Submitted 27 August, 2022;
originally announced August 2022.
-
An Empirical Study of Challenges in Converting Deep Learning Models
Authors:
Moses Openja,
Amin Nikanjam,
Ahmed Haj Yahmed,
Foutse Khomh,
Zhen Ming,
Jiang
Abstract:
There is an increase in deploying Deep Learning (DL)-based software systems in real-world applications. Usually DL models are developed and trained using DL frameworks that have their own internal mechanisms/formats to represent and train DL models, and usually those formats cannot be recognized by other frameworks. Moreover, trained models are usually deployed in environments different from where…
▽ More
There is an increase in deploying Deep Learning (DL)-based software systems in real-world applications. Usually DL models are developed and trained using DL frameworks that have their own internal mechanisms/formats to represent and train DL models, and usually those formats cannot be recognized by other frameworks. Moreover, trained models are usually deployed in environments different from where they were developed. To solve the interoperability issue and make DL models compatible with different frameworks/environments, some exchange formats are introduced for DL models, like ONNX and CoreML. However, ONNX and CoreML were never empirically evaluated by the community to reveal their prediction accuracy, performance, and robustness after conversion. Poor accuracy or non-robust behavior of converted models may lead to poor quality of deployed DL-based software systems. We conduct, in this paper, the first empirical study to assess ONNX and CoreML for converting trained DL models. In our systematic approach, two popular DL frameworks, Keras and PyTorch, are used to train five widely used DL models on three popular datasets. The trained models are then converted to ONNX and CoreML and transferred to two runtime environments designated for such formats, to be evaluated. We investigate the prediction accuracy before and after conversion. Our results unveil that the prediction accuracy of converted models are at the same level of originals. The performance (time cost and memory consumption) of converted models are studied as well. The size of models are reduced after conversion, which can result in optimized DL-based software deployment. Converted models are generally assessed as robust at the same level of originals. However, obtained results show that CoreML models are more vulnerable to adversarial attacks compared to ONNX.
△ Less
Submitted 28 June, 2022;
originally announced June 2022.
-
Studying the Practices of Deploying Machine Learning Projects on Docker
Authors:
Moses Openja,
Forough Majidi,
Foutse Khomh,
Bhagya Chembakottu,
Heng Li
Abstract:
Docker is a containerization service that allows for convenient deployment of websites, databases, applications' APIs, and machine learning (ML) models with a few lines of code. Studies have recently explored the use of Docker for deploying general software projects with no specific focus on how Docker is used to deploy ML-based projects.
In this study, we conducted an exploratory study to under…
▽ More
Docker is a containerization service that allows for convenient deployment of websites, databases, applications' APIs, and machine learning (ML) models with a few lines of code. Studies have recently explored the use of Docker for deploying general software projects with no specific focus on how Docker is used to deploy ML-based projects.
In this study, we conducted an exploratory study to understand how Docker is being used to deploy ML-based projects. As the initial step, we examined the categories of ML-based projects that use Docker. We then examined why and how these projects use Docker, and the characteristics of the resulting Docker images. Our results indicate that six categories of ML-based projects use Docker for deployment, including ML Applications, MLOps/ AIOps, Toolkits, DL Frameworks, Models, and Documentation. We derived the taxonomy of 21 major categories representing the purposes of using Docker, including those specific to models such as model management tasks (e.g., testing, training). We then showed that ML engineers use Docker images mostly to help with the platform portability, such as transferring the software across the operating systems, runtimes such as GPU, and language constraints. However, we also found that more resources may be required to run the Docker images for building ML-based software projects due to the large number of files contained in the image layers with deeply nested directories. We hope to shed light on the emerging practices of deploying ML software projects using containers and highlight aspects that should be improved.
△ Less
Submitted 1 June, 2022;
originally announced June 2022.
-
Technical Debts and Faults in Open-source Quantum Software Systems: An Empirical Study
Authors:
Moses Openja,
Mohammad Mehdi Morovati,
Le An,
Foutse Khomh,
Mouna Abidi
Abstract:
Quantum computing is a rapidly growing field attracting the interest of both researchers and software developers. Supported by its numerous open-source tools, developers can now build, test, or run their quantum algorithms. Although the maintenance practices for traditional software systems have been extensively studied, the maintenance of quantum software is still a new field of study but a criti…
▽ More
Quantum computing is a rapidly growing field attracting the interest of both researchers and software developers. Supported by its numerous open-source tools, developers can now build, test, or run their quantum algorithms. Although the maintenance practices for traditional software systems have been extensively studied, the maintenance of quantum software is still a new field of study but a critical part to ensure the quality of a whole quantum computing system. In this work, we set out to investigate the distribution and evolution of technical debts in quantum software and their relationship with fault occurrences. Understanding these problems could guide future quantum development and provide maintenance recommendations for the key areas where quantum software developers and researchers should pay more attention. In this paper, we empirically studied 118 open-source quantum projects, which were selected from GitHub. The projects are categorized into 10 categories. We found that the studied quantum software suffers from the issues of code convention violation, error-handling, and code design. We also observed a statistically significant correlation between code design, redundant code or code convention, and the occurrences of faults in quantum software.
△ Less
Submitted 1 June, 2022;
originally announced June 2022.
-
Understanding Quantum Software Engineering Challenges An Empirical Study on Stack Exchange Forums and GitHub Issues
Authors:
Mohamed Raed El aoun,
Heng Li,
Foutse Khomh,
Moses Openja
Abstract:
With the advance in quantum computing, quantum software becomes critical for exploring the full potential of quantum computing systems. Recently, quantum software engineering (QSE) becomes an emerging area attracting more and more attention. However, it is not clear what are the challenges and opportunities of quantum computing facing the software engineering community. This work aims to understan…
▽ More
With the advance in quantum computing, quantum software becomes critical for exploring the full potential of quantum computing systems. Recently, quantum software engineering (QSE) becomes an emerging area attracting more and more attention. However, it is not clear what are the challenges and opportunities of quantum computing facing the software engineering community. This work aims to understand the QSE-related challenges perceived by developers. We perform an empirical study on Stack Exchange forums where developers post-QSE-related questions & answers and Github issue reports where developers raise QSE-related issues in practical quantum computing projects. Based on an existing taxonomy of question types on Stack Overflow, we first perform a qualitative analysis of the types of QSE-related questions asked on Stack Exchange forums. We then use automated topic modeling to uncover the topics in QSE-related Stack Exchange posts and GitHub issue reports. Our study highlights some particularly challenging areas of QSE that are different from that of traditional software engineering, such as explaining the theory behind quantum computing code, interpreting quantum program outputs, and bridging the knowledge gap between quantum computing and classical computing, as well as their associated opportunities.
△ Less
Submitted 6 May, 2022;
originally announced May 2022.
-
Are Multi-language Design Smells Fault-prone? An Empirical Study
Authors:
Mouna Abidi,
Md Saidur Rahman,
Moses Openja,
Foutse Khomh
Abstract:
Nowadays, modern applications are developed using components written in different programming languages. These systems introduce several advantages. However, as the number of languages increases, so does the challenges related to the development and maintenance of these systems. In such situations, developers may introduce design smells (i.e., anti-patterns and code smells) which are symptoms of p…
▽ More
Nowadays, modern applications are developed using components written in different programming languages. These systems introduce several advantages. However, as the number of languages increases, so does the challenges related to the development and maintenance of these systems. In such situations, developers may introduce design smells (i.e., anti-patterns and code smells) which are symptoms of poor design and implementation choices. Design smells are defined as poor design and coding choices that can negatively impact the quality of a software program despite satisfying functional requirements. Studies on mono-language systems suggest that the presence of design smells affects code comprehension, thus making systems harder to maintain. However, these studies target only mono-language systems and do not consider the interaction between different programming languages. In this paper, we present an approach to detect multi-language design smells in the context of JNI systems. We then investigate the prevalence of those design smells. Specifically, we detect 15 design smells in 98 releases of nine open-source JNI projects. Our results show that the design smells are prevalent in the selected projects and persist throughout the releases of the systems. We observe that in the analyzed systems, 33.95% of the files involving communications between Java and C/C++ contains occurrences of multi-language design smells. Some kinds of smells are more prevalent than others, e.g., Unused Parameters, Too Much Scattering, Unused Method Declaration. Our results suggest that files with multi-language design smells can often be more associated with bugs than files without these smells, and that specific smells are more correlated to fault-proneness than others.
△ Less
Submitted 2 November, 2020; v1 submitted 27 October, 2020;
originally announced October 2020.
