An exploratory study on library aging by monitoring client usage in a software ecosystem
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In recent times, use of third-party libraries has become prevalent practice in contemporary software development. Much like other code components, unmaintained libraries are a cause for concern, especially when it risks code degradation over time. Therefore, awareness of when a library should be updated is important. With the emergence of large libraries hosting repositories such as Maven Central, we can leverage the dynamics of these ecosystems to understand and estimate when a library is due for an update. In this paper, based on the concepts of software aging, we empirically explore library usage as a means to describe its age. The study covers about 1,500 libraries belonging to the Maven software ecosystem. Results show that library usage changes are not random, with 81.7% of the popular libraries fitting typical polynomial models. Further analysis show that ecosystem factors such as emerging rivals has an effect on aging characteristics. Our preliminary findings demonstrate that awareness of library aging and its characteristics is a promising step towards aiding client systems in the maintenance of their libraries.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it