Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 33

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 66 of the 66 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

GrimoireLab: A toolset for software development analytics

Dueñas, Santiago, Cosentino, Valerio, Gonzalez-Barahona, Jesus M., del Castillo San Felix, Alvaro, Izquierdo-Cortazar, Daniel, Cañas-Díaz, Luis, Pérez García-Plaza, Alberto·2021·PeerJ Computer Science
DOI 10.7717/peerj-cs.601
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Background: After many years of research on software repositories, the knowledge for building mature, reusable tools that perform data retrieval, storage and basic analytics is readily available. However, there is still room to improvement in the area of reusable tools implementing this knowledge. Goal: To produce a reusable toolset supporting the most common tasks when retrieving, curating and visualizing data from software repositories, allowing for the easy reproduction of data sets ready for more complex analytics, and sparing the researcher or the analyst of most of the tasks that can be automated. Method: Use our experience in building tools in this domain to identify a collection of scenarios where a reusable toolset would be convenient, and the main components of such a toolset. Then build those components, and refine them incrementally using the feedback from their use in both commercial, community-based, and academic environments. Results: GrimoireLab, an efficient toolset composed of five main components, supporting about 30 different kinds of data sources related to software development. It has been tested in many environments, for performing different kinds of studies, and providing different kinds of services. It features a common API for accessing the retrieved data, facilities for relating items from different data sources, semi-structured storage for easing later analysis and reproduction, and basic facilities for visualization, preliminary analysis and drill-down in the data. It is also modular, making it easy to support new kinds of data sources and analysis. Conclusions: We present a mature toolset, widely tested in the field, that can help to improve the situation in the area of reusable tools for mining software repositories. We show some scenarios where it has already been used. We expect it will help to reduce the effort for doing studies or providing services in this area, leading to advances in reproducibility and comparison of results.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.7717/peerj-cs.601

Cites

66 of 66 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. European Parliament and Council of the European Union, 2016, Regulation on the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data, and repealing Directive 95/46/EC (Data Protection Directive), Official Journal of the European Union, EUR-Lex Document 32016R0679, May 2016, 1
  2. Rubin, 2007, Process mining framework for software processes, 4470

Metadata

Authors
Dueñas, S., Cosentino, V., Gonzalez-Barahona, J. M., del Castillo San Felix, A., Izquierdo-Cortazar, D., Cañas-Díaz, L., & Pérez García-Plaza, A.
Venue
PeerJ Computer Science
Publisher
PeerJ
Published
2021-07-09
Volume
7
Pages
e601
ISSN
2376-5992
DOI
10.7717/peerj-cs.601
Cited by
33
References
66
Language
en
Licence
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (unspecified)
Funders
  • Ministerio de Ciencia y Tecnología of Spain (RTI2018-101963-B-I00, RTC-2017-6554-7)
  • Ministerio de Economia y Competitividad of Spain (PTQ-15-07709)

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.