Software metrics offer us the promise of distilling useful information from vast amounts of software in order to track development progress, to gain insights into the nature of the software, and to identify potential problems. Unfortunately, however, many software metrics exhibit highly skewed, nonGaussian distributions. As a consequence, usual ways of interpreting these metrics -for example, in terms of "average" values -can be highly misleading. Many metrics, it turns out, are distributed like wealth -with high concentrations of values in selected locations. We propose to analyze software metrics using the Gini coefficient, a higherorder statistic widely used in economics to study the distribution of wealth. Our approach allows us not only to observe changes in software systems efficiently, but also to assess project risks and monitor the development process itself. We apply the Gini coefficient to numerous metrics over a range of software projects, and we show that many metrics not only display remarkably high Gini values, but that these values are remarkably consistent as a project evolves over time.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

Recent advances in artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning (ML), such as computer vision, are now available as intelligent services and their accessibility and simplicity is compelling. Multiple vendors now offer this technology as cloud services and developers want to leverage these advances to provide value to end-users. However, there is no firm investigation into the maintenance and evolution risks arising from use of these intelligent services; in particular, their behavioural consistency and transparency of their functionality. We evaluated the responses of three different intelligent services (specifically computer vision) over 11 months using 3 different data sets, verifying responses against the respective documentation and assessing evolution risk. We found that there are: (1) inconsistencies in how these services behave; (2) evolution risk in the responses; and (3) a lack of clear communication that documents these risks and inconsistencies. We propose a set of recommendations to both developers and intelligent service providers to inform risk and assist maintainability.