Background. Machine learning (ML) has rapidly grown in popularity, becoming a vital part of many industries. This swift expansion has brought about new challenges to technical debt, maintainability and the general software quality of ML systems. With ML applications becoming more prevalent, there is an emerging need for extensive research to keep up with the pace of developments. Currently, the research on code smells in ML applications is limited and there is a lack of tools and studies that address these issues in-depth. This gap in the research highlights the necessity for a focused investigation into the validity of ML-specific code smells in ML applications, setting the stage for this research study.

Objectives. Addressing the limited research on ML-specific code smells within Python-based ML applications. To achieve this, the study begins with the identification of these ML-specific code smells. Once recognized, the next objective is to choose suitable methods and tools to design and develop a static code analysis tool based on code smell criteria. After development, an empirical evaluation will assess both the tool’s efficacy and performance. Additionally, feedback from industry professionals will be sought to measure the tool’s feasibility and usefulness.

Methods. This research employed Design Science Methodology. In the problem identification phase, a literature review was conducted to identify ML-specific code smells. In solution design, a secondary literature review and consultations with experts were performed to select methods and tools for implementing the tool. Additionally, 160 open-source ML applications were sourced from GitHub. The tool was empirically tested against these applications, with a focus on assessing its performance and efficacy. Furthermore, using the static validation method, feedback on the tool’s usefulness was gathered through an expert survey, which involved 15 ML professionals from Ericsson.

Results. The study introduced MLpylint, a tool designed to identify 20 ML-specific code smells in Python-based ML applications. MLpylint effectively analyzed 160ML applications within 36 minutes, identifying in total 5380 code smells, although, highlighting the need for further refinements to each code smell checker to accurately identify specific patterns. In the expert survey, 15 ML professionals from Ericsson acknowledged the tool’s usefulness, user-friendliness and efficiency. However, they also indicated room for improvement in fine-tuning the tool to avoid ambiguous smells.

Conclusions. Current studies on ML-specific code smells are limited, with few tools addressing them. The development and evaluation of MLpylint is a significant advancement in the ML software quality domain, enhancing reliability and reducing associated technical debt in ML applications. As the industry integrates such tools, it’s vital they evolve to detect code smells from new ML libraries. Aiding developers in upholding superior software quality but also promoting further research in the ML software quality domain.