Papers › BotHawk: An Approach for Bots Detection in Open Source Software Projects
BotHawk: An Approach for Bots Detection in Open Source Software Projects
Fenglin Bi, Zhiwei Zhu, Wei Wang, Xiaoya Xia, Hassan Ali Khan, Peng Pu
Social coding platforms have revolutionized collaboration in software development, leading to using software bots for streamlining operations. However, The presence of open-source software (OSS) bots gives rise to problems including impersonation, spamming, bias, and security risks. Identifying bot accounts and behavior is a challenging task in the OSS project. This research aims to investigate bots' behavior in open-source software projects and identify bot accounts with maximum possible accuracy. Our team gathered a dataset of 19,779 accounts that meet standardized criteria to enable future research on bots in open-source projects. We follow a rigorous workflow to ensure that the data we collect is accurate, generalizable, scalable, and up-to-date. We've identified four types of bot accounts in open-source software projects by analyzing their behavior across 17 features in 5 dimensions. Our team created BotHawk, a highly effective model for detecting bots in open-source software projects. It outperforms other models, achieving an AUC of 0.947 and an F1-score of 0.89. BotHawk can detect a wider variety of bots, including CI/CD and scanning bots. Furthermore, we find that the number of followers, number of repositories, and tags contain the most relevant features to identify the account type.
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