On the Classification of Refactoring Code Reviews

Code review has become standard practice in both business and open source projects with the objective of improving software quality, promoting knowledge exchange, and ensuring adherence to coding rules and guidelines. It involves developer discussions on potential refactoring operations before incorporating changes into the code base. Despite extensive investigations into the general challenges, best practices, and socio-technical elements of code review, there is limited understanding about the assessment of refactoring and what developers prioritize when examining refactored code. Therefore, our study aims to comprehend the primary factors developers consider when reviewing refactored code. To do so, we design a model that takes as input a given code review conversation, and classifies it into one refactoring category, e.g., quality, integration, testing, etc. Multiple machine learning approaches are used and evaluated, and the experimental results are examined qualitatively and quantitatively at various granularities. Refactoring-related code review category prediction is found to be possible with high consistency, achieving an average scores of 0.8 on accepted universal classification metrics, through the utilization of contemporary and traditional machine learning approaches. These findings suggest that refactoring code review categorization can be embedded in traditional workflows to increase efficiency and decrease the time to production in software development.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Published
2025-04-05
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1109/icmi65310.2025.11141041
Primary Topic
Web Data Mining and Analysis
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

On the Classification of Refactoring Code Reviews

Jérôme Richard, AbdElRahman ElSaid, Yeshwant Santhanakrishnan Premanand, Mohamed Wiem Mkaouer et al.
Web Data Mining and Analysis
article

On the Classification of Refactoring Code Reviews

Jérôme Richard, AbdElRahman ElSaid, Yeshwant Santhanakrishnan Premanand, Mohamed Wiem Mkaouer, Eman Abdullah AlOmar, Josef Sieber, Tim Schwirtlich, John Paul Raj
article en

Abstract

Code review has become standard practice in both business and open source projects with the objective of improving software quality, promoting knowledge exchange, and ensuring adherence to coding rules and guidelines. It involves developer discussions on potential refactoring operations before incorporating changes into the code base. Despite extensive investigations into the general challenges, best practices, and socio-technical elements of code review, there is limited understanding about the assessment of refactoring and what developers prioritize when examining refactored code. Therefore, our study aims to comprehend the primary factors developers consider when reviewing refactored code. To do so, we design a model that takes as input a given code review conversation, and classifies it into one refactoring category, e.g., quality, integration, testing, etc. Multiple machine learning approaches are used and evaluated, and the experimental results are examined qualitatively and quantitatively at various granularities. Refactoring-related code review category prediction is found to be possible with high consistency, achieving an average scores of 0.8 on accepted universal classification metrics, through the utilization of contemporary and traditional machine learning approaches. These findings suggest that refactoring code review categorization can be embedded in traditional workflows to increase efficiency and decrease the time to production in software development.

Stevens Institute of Technology (US), University of North Carolina Wilmington (US), Rochester Institute of Technology (US), University of Michigan–Flint (US)
Openalex Percentile: Top 65%
Web Data Mining and Analysis
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

On the Classification of Refactoring Code Reviews — Jérôme Richard, AbdElRahman ElSaid, et al. · (2025) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS