Paper detail

Multi-Artifact Analysis of Self-Admitted Technical Debt in Scientific Software

Context: Self-admitted technical debt (SATD) occurs when developers acknowledge shortcuts in code. In scientific software (SSW), such debt poses unique risks to the validity and reproducibility of results. Objective: This study aims to identify, categorize, and evaluate scientific debt, a specialized form of SATD in SSW, and assess the extent to which traditional SATD categories capture these domain-specific issues. Method: We conduct a multi-artifact analysis across code comments, commit messages, pull requests, and issue trackers from 23 open-source SSW projects. We construct and validate a curated dataset of scientific debt, develop a multi-source SATD classifier, and conduct a practitioner validation to assess the practical relevance of scientific debt. Results: Our classifier performs strongly across 900,358 artifacts from 23 SSW projects. SATD is most prevalent in pull requests and issue trackers, underscoring the value of multi-artifact analysis. Models trained on traditional SATD often miss scientific debt, emphasizing the need for its explicit detection in SSW. Practitioner validation confirmed that scientific debt is both recognizable and useful in practice. Conclusions: Scientific debt represents a unique form of SATD in SSW that that is not adequately captured by traditional categories and requires specialized identification and management. Our dataset, classification analysis, and practitioner validation results provide the first formal multi-artifact perspective on scientific debt, highlighting the need for tailored SATD detection approaches in SSW.

preprint2026arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

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 graph slice

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.