How do machine learning models change?
The proliferation of Machine Learning (ML) models and their open-source implementations has transformed Artificial Intelligence research and applications. Platforms like Hugging Face (HF) enable this evolving ecosystem, yet a large-scale longitudinal study of how these models change is lacking. This...
| Autores: | , , , , |
|---|---|
| Tipo de recurso: | artículo |
| Fecha de publicación: | 2025 |
| País: | España |
| Institución: | Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya (UPC) |
| Repositorio: | UPCommons. Portal del coneixement obert de la UPC |
| Idioma: | inglés |
| OAI Identifier: | oai:upcommons.upc.edu:2117/443035 |
| Acceso en línea: | https://hdl.handle.net/2117/443035 https://dx.doi.org/10.1145/3767157 |
| Access Level: | acceso abierto |
| Palabra clave: | ML software evolution ML model changes ML software releases Commit type classification Bayesian networks in software engineering Àrees temàtiques de la UPC::Informàtica::Intel·ligència artificial::Aprenentatge automàtic Àrees temàtiques de la UPC::Informàtica::Sistemes d'informació |
| Sumario: | The proliferation of Machine Learning (ML) models and their open-source implementations has transformed Artificial Intelligence research and applications. Platforms like Hugging Face (HF) enable this evolving ecosystem, yet a large-scale longitudinal study of how these models change is lacking. This study addresses this gap by analyzing over 680,000 commits from 100,000 models and 2,251 releases from 202 of these models on HF using repository mining and longitudinal methods. We apply an extended ML change taxonomy to classify commits and use Bayesian networks to model temporal patterns in commit and release activities. Our findings show that commit activities align with established data science methodologies, such as the Cross-Industry Standard Process for Data Mining (CRISP-DM), emphasizing iterative refinement. Release patterns tend to consolidate significant updates, particularly in model outputs, sharing, and documentation, distinguishing them from granular commits. Furthermore, projects with higher popularity exhibit distinct evolutionary paths, often starting from a more mature baseline with fewer foundational commits in their public history. In contrast, those with intensive collaboration show unique documentation and technical evolution patterns. These insights enhance the understanding of model changes on community platforms and provide valuable guidance for best practices in model maintenance. |
|---|