Software is an essential component of research. However, little attention has been paid to it compared with that paid to research data. Recently, there has been an increase in efforts to acknowledge and highlight the importance of software in research activities. Structured metadata from platforms like bio.tools, Bioconductor, and Galaxy ToolShed offers valuable insights into research software in the Life Sciences. Although originally intended to support discovery and integration, this metadata can be repurposed for large-scale analysis of software practices. However, its quality and completeness vary across platforms, reflecting diverse documentation practices. To gain a comprehensive view of software development and sustainability, consolidating this metadata is necessary, but requires robust mechanisms to address its heterogeneity and scale. This article presents an evaluation of instruction-tuned large language models for the task of software metadata identity resolution, a critical step in assembling a cohesive collection of research software. Such a collection is the reference component for the Software Observatory at OpenEBench, a platform that aggregates metadata to monitor the FAIRness of research software in the Life Sciences. We benchmarked multiple models against a human-annotated gold standard, examined their behavior on ambiguous cases, and introduced an agreement-based proxy for high-confidence automated decisions. The proxy achieved high precision and statistical robustness, while also highlighting the limitations of current models and the broader challenges of automating semantic judgment in FAIR-aligned software metadata across registries and repositories.

The Information Retrieval in Software Engineering (IRSE) track aims to develop solutions for automated evaluation of code comments in a machine learning framework based on human and large language model generated labels. In this track, there is a binary classification task to classify comments as useful and not useful. The dataset consists of 9048 code comments and surrounding code snippet pairs extracted from open source github C based projects and an additional dataset generated individually by teams using large language models. Overall 56 experiments have been submitted by 17 teams from various universities and software companies. The submissions have been evaluated quantitatively using the F1-Score and qualitatively based on the type of features developed, the supervised learning model used and their corresponding hyper-parameters. The labels generated from large language models increase the bias in the prediction model but lead to less over-fitted results.