MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4411271495 · doi:10.1109/msr66628.2025.00120

CoMRAT: Commit Message Rationale Analysis Tool

2025· article· en· W4411271495 on OpenAlexaff
Mouna Dhaouadi, Bentley Oakes, Michalis Famelis

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicService-Oriented Architecture and Web Services
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique MontréalUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCommitComputer scienceProgramming languageDatabase

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In collaborative open-source development, the rationale for code changes is often captured in commit messages, making them a rich source of valuable information. However, research on rationale in commit messages remains limited. In this paper, we present CoMRAT, a tool for analyzing decision and rationale sentences rationale in commit messages. CoMRAT enables a) researchers to produce metrics and analyses on rationale information in any Github module, and b) developers to check the amount of rationale in their commit messages. A preliminary evaluation suggests the tool’s usefulness and usability in both these research and development contexts.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.057
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.056

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.057
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0100.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.005
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0140.006

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.

Opus teacher head0.005
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.227 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicService-Oriented Architecture and Web ServicesFrench-language works237,207