Shurui Zhou

Nadia Nahar, Haoran Zhang, Grace Lewis et al. · cmu

Incorporating machine learning (ML) components into software products raises new software-engineering challenges and exacerbates existing challenges. Many researchers have invested significant effort in understanding the challenges of industry practitioners working on building products with ML components, through interviews and surveys with practitioners. With the intention to aggregate and present their collective findings, we conduct a meta-summary study: We collect 50 relevant papers that together interacted with over 4758 practitioners using guidelines for systematic literature reviews. We then collected, grouped, and organized the over 500 mentions of challenges within those papers. We highlight the most commonly reported challenges and hope this meta-summary will be a useful resource for the research community to prioritize research and education in this field.

Avinash Bhat, Austin Coursey, Grace Hu et al.

The documentation practice for machine-learned (ML) models often falls short of established practices for traditional software, which impedes model accountability and inadvertently abets inappropriate or misuse of models. Recently, model cards, a proposal for model documentation, have attracted notable attention, but their impact on the actual practice is unclear. In this work, we systematically study the model documentation in the field and investigate how to encourage more responsible and accountable documentation practice. Our analysis of publicly available model cards reveals a substantial gap between the proposal and the practice. We then design a tool named DocML aiming to (1) nudge the data scientists to comply with the model cards proposal during the model development, especially the sections related to ethics, and (2) assess and manage the documentation quality. A lab study reveals the benefit of our tool towards long-term documentation quality and accountability.

Jiessie Tie, Bingsheng Yao, Tianshi Li et al.

Software engineers are increasingly incorporating AI assistants into their workflows to enhance productivity and alleviate cognitive load. However, experiences with large language models (LLMs) such as ChatGPT vary widely. While some engineers find them useful, others deem them counterproductive due to inaccuracies in their responses. Researchers have also observed that ChatGPT often provides incorrect information. Given these limitations, it is crucial to determine how to effectively integrate LLMs into software engineering (SE) workflow. Analyzing data from 26 participants in a complex web development task, we identified nine failure types categorized into incorrect or incomplete responses, cognitive overload, and context loss. Users attempted to mitigate these issues through scaffolding, prompt clarification, and debugging. However, 17 participants ultimately chose to abandon ChatGPT due to persistent failures. Our quantitative analysis revealed that unhelpful responses increased the likelihood of abandonment by a factor of 11, while each additional prompt reduced abandonment probability by 17%. This study advances the understanding of human-AI interaction in SE tasks and outlines directions for future research and tooling support.

Nadia Nahar, Shurui Zhou, Grace Lewis et al.

The introduction of machine learning (ML) components in software projects has created the need for software engineers to collaborate with data scientists and other specialists. While collaboration can always be challenging, ML introduces additional challenges with its exploratory model development process, additional skills and knowledge needed, difficulties testing ML systems, need for continuous evolution and monitoring, and non-traditional quality requirements such as fairness and explainability. Through interviews with 45 practitioners from 28 organizations, we identified key collaboration challenges that teams face when building and deploying ML systems into production. We report on common collaboration points in the development of production ML systems for requirements, data, and integration, as well as corresponding team patterns and challenges. We find that most of these challenges center around communication, documentation, engineering, and process and collect recommendations to address these challenges.