The increasing adoption of Jupyter notebooks in data science and machine learning workflows has created a gap between exploratory code development and production-ready software systems. While notebooks excel at iterative development and visualization, they often lack proper software engineering principles, making their transition to production environments challenging. This paper presents Codelevate, a novel multi-agent system that automatically transforms Jupyter notebooks into well-structured, maintainable Python code repositories. Our system employs three specialized agents - Architect, Developer, and Structure - working in concert through a shared dependency tree to ensure architectural coherence and code quality. Our experimental results validate Codelevate's capability to bridge the prototype-to-production gap through autonomous code transformation, yielding quantifiable improvements in code quality metrics while preserving computational semantics.

Machine Learning (ML) code, particularly within notebooks, often exhibits lower quality compared to traditional software. Bad practices arise at three distinct levels: general Python coding conventions, the organizational structure of the notebook itself, and ML-specific aspects such as reproducibility and correct API usage. However, existing analysis tools typically focus on only one of these levels and struggle to capture ML-specific semantics, limiting their ability to detect issues. This paper introduces Vespucci Linter, a static analysis tool with multi-level capabilities, built on Moose and designed to address this challenge. Leveraging a metamodeling approach that unifies the notebook's structural elements with Python code entities, our linter enables a more contextualized analysis to identify issues across all three levels. We implemented 22 linting rules derived from the literature and applied our tool to a corpus of 5,000 notebooks from the Kaggle platform. The results reveal violations at all levels, validating the relevance of our multi-level approach and demonstrating Vespucci Linter's potential to improve the quality and reliability of ML development in notebook environments.

Generative AI offers potential for educational support, but often lacks pedagogical grounding and awareness of the student's learning context. Furthermore, researching student interactions with these tools within authentic learning environments remains challenging. To address this, we present JELAI, an open-source platform architecture designed to integrate fine-grained Learning Analytics (LA) with Large Language Model (LLM)-based tutoring directly within a Jupyter Notebook environment. JELAI employs a modular, containerized design featuring JupyterLab extensions for telemetry and chat, alongside a central mid-dleware handling LA processing and context-aware LLM prompt enrichment. This architecture enables the capture of integrated code interaction and chat data, facilitating real-time, context-sensitive AI scaffolding and research into student behaviour. We describe the system's design, implementation, and demonstrate its feasibility through system performance benchmarks and two proof-of-concept use cases illustrating its capabilities for logging multi-modal data, analysing help-seeking patterns, and supporting A/B testing of AI configurations. JELAI's primary contribution is its technical framework, providing a flexible tool for researchers and educators to develop, deploy, and study LA-informed AI tutoring within the widely used Jupyter ecosystem.

As machine learning systems are increasingly deployed in high-stakes domains such as criminal justice, finance, and healthcare, the demand for interpretable and trustworthy models has intensified. Despite the proliferation of local explanation techniques, including SHAP, LIME, and counterfactual methods, there exists no standardized, reproducible framework for their comparative evaluation, particularly in fairness-sensitive settings. We introduce ExplainBench, an open-source benchmarking suite for systematic evaluation of local model explanations across ethically consequential datasets. ExplainBench provides unified wrappers for popular explanation algorithms, integrates end-to-end pipelines for model training and explanation generation, and supports evaluation via fidelity, sparsity, and robustness metrics. The framework includes a Streamlit-based graphical interface for interactive exploration and is packaged as a Python module for seamless integration into research workflows. We demonstrate ExplainBench on datasets commonly used in fairness research, such as COMPAS, UCI Adult Income, and LendingClub, and showcase how different explanation methods behave under a shared experimental protocol. By enabling reproducible, comparative analysis of local explanations, ExplainBench advances the methodological foundations of interpretable machine learning and facilitates accountability in real-world AI systems.

A BSTRACT In this work, we present a benchmark that consists of Jupyter notebooks development trajectories and allows measuring how large language models (LLMs) can leverage runtime information for predicting code output and code generation. We demonstrate that the current generation of LLMs performs poorly on these tasks and argue that there exists a significantly understudied domain in the development of code-based models, which involves incorporating the runtime context. 1 I NTRODUCTION Recent developments in code completion and generation have been significant. Over the past several years, the field has progressed from generating relatively simple programs (Chen et al., 2021) to solving real-world issues within software repositories (Jimenez et al., 2023). However, most studies in this area are based on static snapshots of code (Jiang et al., 2024), with only a small body of research exploring the potential of leveraging dynamic code properties, such as runtime information and memory state, for code generation (Chen et al., 2024). A key reason for this limitation is that common programming environments rarely allow code generation during execution, which is when runtime information can be gathered.

Grading student assignments in STEM courses is a laborious and repetitive task for tutors, often requiring a week to assess an entire class. For students, this delay of feedback prevents iterating on incorrect solutions, hampers learning, and increases stress when exercise scores determine admission to the final exam. Recent advances in AI-assisted education, such as automated grading and tutoring systems, aim to address these challenges by providing immediate feedback and reducing grading workload. However, existing solutions often fall short due to privacy concerns, reliance on proprietary closed-source models, lack of support for combining Markdown, LaTeX and Python code, or excluding course tutors from the grading process. To overcome these limitations, we introduce PyEvalAI, an AI-assisted evaluation system, which automatically scores Jupyter notebooks using a combination of unit tests and a locally hosted language model to preserve privacy. Our approach is free, open-source, and ensures tutors maintain full control over the grading process. A case study demonstrates its effectiveness in improving feedback speed and grading efficiency for exercises in a university-level course on numerics.