Source author record

Luigi Quaranta

Luigi Quaranta appears in the imported research catalog. Authorship, coauthor and topic links are available while profile ownership is still unclaimed.

ResearcherUnclaimed source record

Catalog footprint

What is connected

3works
4topics
2close collaborators

Actions

Connect this record

Log in to claim

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent papers, topics, institutions and collaborators without losing the researcher page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Published work

3 published item(s)

preprint2022arXiv

Assessing the Quality of Computational Notebooks for a Frictionless Transition from Exploration to Production

The massive trend of integrating data-driven AI capabilities into traditional software systems is rising new intriguing challenges. One of such challenges is achieving a smooth transition from the explorative phase of Machine Learning projects - in which data scientists build prototypical models in the lab - to their production phase - in which software engineers translate prototypes into production-ready AI components. To narrow down the gap between these two phases, tools and practices adopted by data scientists might be improved by incorporating consolidated software engineering solutions. In particular, computational notebooks have a prominent role in determining the quality of data science prototypes. In my research project, I address this challenge by studying the best practices for collaboration with computational notebooks and proposing proof-of-concept tools to foster guidelines compliance.

preprint2022arXiv

Eliciting Best Practices for Collaboration with Computational Notebooks

Despite the widespread adoption of computational notebooks, little is known about best practices for their usage in collaborative contexts. In this paper, we fill this gap by eliciting a catalog of best practices for collaborative data science with computational notebooks. With this aim, we first look for best practices through a multivocal literature review. Then, we conduct interviews with professional data scientists to assess their awareness of these best practices. Finally, we assess the adoption of best practices through the analysis of 1,380 Jupyter notebooks retrieved from the Kaggle platform. Findings reveal that experts are mostly aware of the best practices and tend to adopt them in their daily work. Nonetheless, they do not consistently follow all the recommendations as, depending on specific contexts, some are deemed unfeasible or counterproductive due to the lack of proper tool support. As such, we envision the design of notebook solutions that allow data scientists not to have to prioritize exploration and rapid prototyping over writing code of quality.

preprint2022arXiv

Pynblint: a Static Analyzer for Python Jupyter Notebooks

Jupyter Notebook is the tool of choice of many data scientists in the early stages of ML workflows. The notebook format, however, has been criticized for inducing bad programming practices; indeed, researchers have already shown that open-source repositories are inundated by poor-quality notebooks. Low-quality output from the prototypical stages of ML workflows constitutes a clear bottleneck towards the productization of ML models. To foster the creation of better notebooks, we developed Pynblint, a static analyzer for Jupyter notebooks written in Python. The tool checks the compliance of notebooks (and surrounding repositories) with a set of empirically validated best practices and provides targeted recommendations when violations are detected.