Papers › A First Look at Emoji Usage on GitHub: An Empirical Study
A First Look at Emoji Usage on GitHub: An Empirical Study
Xuan Lu, Yanbin Cao, Zhenpeng Chen, Xuanzhe Liu
The archive published only this paper's code-link row. Authors, date and abstract are from arXiv's metadata (CC0), read from the Kaggle arXiv metadata snapshot of 2026-09-12 where its title matched the archive's; the title is the archive's.
Emoji is becoming a ubiquitous language and gaining worldwide popularity in recent years including the field of software engineering (SE). As nonverbal cues, emojis are widely used in user understanding tasks such as sentiment analysis, but few work has been done to study emojis in SE scenarios. This paper presents a large scale empirical study on how GitHub users use emojis in development-related communications. We find that emojis are used by a considerable proportion of GitHub users. In comparison to Internet users, developers show interesting usage characteristics and have their own interpretation of the meanings of emojis. In addition, the usage of emojis reflects a positive and supportive culture of this community. Through a manual annotation task, we find that sentimental usage is a main intention of using emojis in issues, pull requests, and comments, while emojis are mainly used to emphasize important contents in README. These findings not only deepen our understanding about the culture of SE communities, but also provide implications on how to facilitate SE tasks with emojis such as sentiment analysis.
Code
Repository list and official/mentioned flags are the archive's, frozen 2025-07-28. Reachability, where shown, is from one Syntology probe window (2026-09-16 to 2026-09-18); repositories not probed show nothing. GitHub stars are not tracked.
Code Syntology ran Syntology
Not run by Syntology. Nothing on this page verifies that the listed code works.
Results from the paper archive 2025-07-28
No leaderboard rows for this paper in the archive.
Report a problem or propose a change · a person checks every report against the paper or source before anything changes; decisions are listed on /corrections