Data from software repositories have become an important foundation for the empirical study of software engineering processes. A recurring theme in the repository mining literature is the inference of developer networks capturing e.g. collaboration, coordination, or communication, from the commit history of projects. Most of the studied networks are based on the co-authorship of software artefacts defined at the level of files, modules, or packages. While this approach has led to insights into the social aspects of software development, it neglects detailed information on code changes and code ownership, e.g. which exact lines of code have been authored by which developers, that is contained in the commit log of software projects. Addressing this issue, we introduce git2net, a scalable python software that facilitates the extraction of fine-grained co-editing networks in large git repositories. It uses text mining techniques to analyse the detailed history of textual modifications within files. This information allows us to construct directed, weighted, and time-stamped networks, where a link signifies that one developer has edited a block of source code originally written by another developer. Our tool is applied in case studies of an Open Source and a commercial software project. We argue that it opens up a massive new source of high-resolution data on human collaboration patterns.
These works have typically constructed based on joint contributions to files, modules, or projects. Such coarse-grained definitions of co-authorship networks introduce a potential issue: They do not distinguish between (i) links between developers that are due to contributions to the same artefact, and (ii) links that are due to commit sequences where one developer builds upon and or redacts the particular lines of source code previously authored by another developer. Networks defined based on the latter type of of code regions are likely associated with a stronger need for coordination and communication than the mere fact that developers edited the same file or module @cite_54 . So far, few studies have adopted such fine-grained approaches to create developer collaboration networks. Notable exceptions include the function-level co-editing networks constructed by @cite_39 . The authors further argue that, using file-based definitions of collaboration networks, network analytic methods fail to identify meaningful communities. The authors of @cite_29 constructed line-based co-editing networks, showing that such an analysis (i) yields insights into the coordination structures of software teams, and (ii) provides new ways to test long-standing hypotheses about cooperative work from social psychology.
@cite_54 @cite_29 @cite_39
2049086518 2963368130 1608828583 2143245657
In this study, we propose and validate social networks based theoretical model for exploring scholars' collaboration (co-authorship) network properties associated with their citation-based research performance (i.e., g-index). Using structural holes theory, we focus on how a scholar's egocentric network properties of density, efficiency and constraint within the network associate with their scholarly performance. For our analysis, we use publication data of high impact factor journals in the field of ''Information Science & Library Science'' between 2000 and 2009, extracted from Scopus. The resulting database contained 4837 publications reflecting the contributions of 8069 authors. Results from our data analysis suggest that research performance of scholars' is significantly correlated with scholars' ego-network measures. In particular, scholars with more co-authors and those who exhibit higher levels of betweenness centrality (i.e., the extent to which a co-author is between another pair of co-authors) perform better in terms of research (i.e., higher g-index). Furthermore, scholars with efficient collaboration networks who maintain a strong co-authorship relationship with one primary co-author within a group of linked co-authors (i.e., co-authors that have joint publications) perform better than those researchers with many relationships to the same group of linked co-authors. Research into socio-technical systems like Wikipedia has overlooked important structural patterns in the coordination of distributed work. This paper argues for a conceptual reorientation towards sequences as a fundamental unit of analysis for understanding work routines in online knowledge collaboration. We outline a research agenda for researchers in computer-supported cooperative work (CSCW) to understand the relationships, patterns, antecedents, and consequences of sequential behavior using methods already developed in fields like bio-informatics. Using a data set of 37,515 revisions from 16,616 unique editors to 96 Wikipedia articles as a case study, we analyze the prevalence and significance of different sequences of editing patterns. We illustrate the mixed method potential of sequence approaches by interpreting the frequent patterns as general classes of behavioral motifs. We conclude by discussing the methodological opportunities for using sequence analysis for expanding existing approaches to analyzing and theorizing about co-production routines in online knowledge collaboration. This article introduces a suite of approaches and measures to study the impact of co-authorship teams based on the number of publications and their citations on a local and global scale. In particular, we present a novel weighted graph representation that encodes coupled author-paper networks as a weighted co-authorship graph. This weighted graph representation is applied to a dataset that captures the emergence of a new field of science and comprises 614 articles published by 1036 unique authors between 1974 and 2004. To characterize the properties and evolution of this field, we first use four different measures of centrality to identify the impact of authors. A global statistical analysis is performed to characterize the distribution of paper production and paper citations and its correlation with the co-authorship team size. The size of co-authorship clusters over time is examined. Finally, a novel local, author-centered measure based on entropy is applied to determine the global evolution of the field and the identification of the contribution of a single author's impact across all of its co-authorship relations. A visualization of the growth of the weighted co-author network, and the results obtained from the statistical analysis indicate a drift toward a more cooperative, global collaboration process as the main drive in the production of scientific knowledge. © 2005 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Complexity 10: 57–67, 2005 â€”We propose a framework for discovery of collaborative community structure in Wiki-based knowledge repositories based on raw-content generation analysis. We leverage topic modelling in order to capture agreement and opposition of contributors and analyze these multi-modal relations to map communities in the contributor base. The key steps of our approach include (i) modeling of pair wise variable-strength contributor interactions that can be both positive and negative, (ii) synthesis of a global network incorporating all pair wise interactions, and (iii) detection and analysis of community structure encoded in such networks. The global community discovery algorithm we propose outperforms existing alternatives in identifying coherent clusters according to objective optimality criteria. Analysis of the discovered community structure reveals coalitions of common interest editors who back each other in promoting some topics and collectively oppose other coalitions or single authors. We couple contributor interactions with content evolution and reveal the global picture of opposing themes within the self-regulated community base for both controversial and featured articles in Wikipedia.