Make Your Tools Sparkle with Trust: The PICSE Framework for Trust in Software Tools
Abstract
The day to day of a software engineer involves a variety of tasks. While many of these tasks are collaborative and completed as such, it is not always possible or feasible to engage with other engineers for task completion. Software tools, such as code generators and static analysis tools, aim to fill this gap by providing additional support for developers to effectively complete their tasks. With a steady stream of new tools that emerging to support software engineers, including a new breed of tools that rely on artificial intelligence, there are important questions we should aim to answer regarding the trust engineers can, and should, put into their software tools and what it means to build a trustworthy tool. In this paper, we present findings from an industry interview study conducted with 18 engineers across and external to the Microsoft organization. Based on these interviews, we introduce the PICSE (pronounced "pixie") framework for trust in software tools to provide preliminary insights into factors that influence engineer trust in their software tools. We also discuss how the PICSE framework can be considered and applied in practice for designing and developing trustworthy software tools.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
No citation lists for this paper
No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.
References 19 · Cited by 27
- Authors
- Johnson, B., Bird, C., Ford, D., Forsgren, N., & Zimmermann, T.
- Affiliations
- George Mason University (US)
- Microsoft (United States) (US)
- Venue
- 2023 IEEE/ACM 45th International Conference on Software Engineering: Software Engineering in Practice (ICSE-SEIP)
- Publisher
- IEEE
- Published
- 2023-05
- Pages
- 409-419
- OpenAlex
- W4383898396
- Cited by
- 27
- References
- 19
- Citations by year
- 2026: 6 · 2025: 15 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 1
- FWCI
- 6.92
- Type
- conference paper
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- IEEE/ACM International Conference on Software Engineering: Software Engineering in Practice (ICSE-SEIP) (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Software Engineering Techniques and Practices
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Software Engineering Research
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Human-Automation Interaction and Safety
- Keywords
- software developers, developer trust, code generators, static analysis tools, tool design, developer interviews
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review