Paper detail

Attention Mechanism and Heuristic Approach: Context-Aware File Ranking Using Multi-Head Self-Attention

The identification and ranking of impacted files within software reposi-tories is a key challenge in change impact analysis. Existing deterministic approaches that combine heuristic signals, semantic similarity measures, and graph-based centrality metrics have demonstrated effectiveness in nar-rowing candidate search spaces, yet their recall plateaus. This limitation stems from the treatment of features as linearly independent contributors, ignoring contextual dependencies and relationships between metrics that characterize expert reasoning patterns. To address this limitation, we propose the application of Multi-Head Self-Attention as a post-deterministic scoring refinement mechanism. Our approach learns contextual weighting between features, dynamically adjust-ing importance levels per file based on relational behavior exhibited across candidate file sets. The attention mechanism produces context-aware adjustments that are additively combined with deterministic scores, pre-serving interpretability while enabling reasoning similar to that performed by experts when reviewing change surfaces. We focus on recall rather than precision, as false negatives (missing impacted files) are far more costly than false positives (irrelevant files that can be quickly dismissed during review). Empirical evaluation on 200 test cases demonstrates that the introduc-tion of self-attention improves Top-50 recall from approximately 62-65% to between 78-82% depending on repository complexity and structure, achiev-ing 80% recall at Top-50 files. Expert validation yields improvement from 6.5/10 to 8.6/10 in subjective accuracy alignment. This transformation bridges the reasoning capability gap between deterministic automation and expert judgment, improving recall in repository-aware effort estimation.

preprint2026arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access4 authors3 topics

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

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

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.