Demonstration venue · read-only. Every page can be browsed; the buttons that would change it are switched off. Create an account to run TaxoReview on your own data. A simulation from public publication records: the people listed were not invited and did not agree to review.
? Tutorial for this page

Tajkia Rahman Toma

dblp:377/6850 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
2ranked-venue papers
2as first author
2since 2021 · last 2025
0000-0003-4383-3494ORCID · corroborated

Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several

Software engineering, systems software and programming languages · 2 · 2 first-author · 2 since 2021Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 1 · 1 first-author · 1 since 2021

Expertise — from the expertise taxonomy: the topics of the expert's papers under the CCF categories. A weight counts papers with recency: 1 for a paper about the topic, 0.3 when the topic is its context, halved every five years.

Software engineering, system software, and programming languages
1 paper
Software maintenance and evolution · 87% Empirical software engineering · 13%

Topics — the 3 heaviest of 3, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Software maintenance and evolution › software ecosystems
model reuse
0.912025
Answering User Questions About Machine Learning Models Through Standardized Model Cards · ICSE 2025
Software maintenance and evolution
software ecosystems
0.912025
Answering User Questions About Machine Learning Models Through Standardized Model Cards · ICSE 2025
Empirical software engineering
mining software repositories
0.312025
Answering User Questions About Machine Learning Models Through Standardized Model Cards · ICSE 2025

Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics

topic analysis · 0.9
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2025 Answering User Questions About Machine Learning Models Through Standardized Model Cards
abstract
Reusing pre-trained machine learning models is becoming very popular due to model hubs such as Hugging Face (HF). However, similar to when reusing software, many issues may arise when reusing an ML model. In many cases, users resort to asking questions on discussion forums such as the HF community forum. In this paper, we study how we can reduce the community's workload in answering these questions and increase the likelihood that questions receive a quick answer. We analyze 11,278 discussions from the HF model community that contain user questions about ML models. We focus on the effort spent handling questions, the high-level topics of discussions, and the potential for standardizing responses in model cards based on a model card template. Our findings indicate that there is not much effort involved in responding to user questions, however, 40.1% of the questions remain open without any response. A topic analysis shows that discussions are more centered around technical details on model development and troubleshooting, indicating that more input from model providers is required. We show that 42.5% of the questions could have been answered if the model provider followed a standard model card template for the model card. Based on our analysis, we recommend that model providers add more development-related details on the model's architecture, algorithm, data preprocessing and training code in existing documentation (sub)sections and add new (sub)sections to the template to address common questions about model usage and hardware requirements.
Tajkia Rahman Toma, Balreet Grewal, Cor-Paul Bezemer
ICSE1
2024 An Exploratory Study of Dataset and Model Management in Open Source Machine Learning Applications
abstract
Datasets and models are two key artifacts in machine learning (ML) applications. Although there exist tools to support dataset and model developers in managing ML artifacts, little is known about how these datasets and models are integrated into ML applications. In this paper, we study how datasets and models in ML applications are managed. In particular, we focus on how these artifacts are stored and versioned alongside the applications. After analyzing 93 repositories, we identified the most common storage location to store datasets and models is the file system, which causes availability issues. Notably, large data and model files, exceeding approximately 60 MB, are stored exclusively in remote storage and downloaded as needed. Most of the datasets and models lack proper integration with the version control system, posing potential trace-ability and reproducibility issues. Additionally, although datasets and models are likely to evolve during the application development, they are rarely updated in application repositories.
Tajkia Rahman Toma, Cor-Paul Bezemer
CAIN1