The DOI matches its Crossref record; 48 of the 48 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
A Large-Scale Survey on the Usability of AI Programming Assistants: Successes and Challenges
Open accessAbstract
The software engineering community recently has witnessed widespread deployment of AI programming assistants, such as GitHub Copilot. However, in practice, developers do not accept AI programming assistants' initial suggestions at a high frequency. This leaves a number of open questions related to the usability of these tools. To understand developers' practices while using these tools and the important usability challenges they face, we administered a survey to a large population of developers and received responses from a diverse set of 410 developers. Through a mix of qualitative and quantitative analyses, we found that developers are most motivated to use AI programming assistants because they help developers reduce key-strokes, finish programming tasks quickly, and recall syntax, but resonate less with using them to help brainstorm potential solutions. We also found the most important reasons why developers do not use these tools are because these tools do not output code that addresses certain functional or non-functional requirements and because developers have trouble controlling the tool to generate the desired output. Our findings have implications for both creators and users of AI programming assistants, such as designing minimal cognitive effort interactions with these tools to reduce distractions for users while they are programming.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“Some recent studies confirm these symptoms: only 40% of CCT suggestions are accepted the first time they are proposed to developers, mainly because developers cannot control context or granularity (Liang et al., 2024).”
From Understanding user mental models in AI-driven code completion tools: Insights from an elicitation study (2025) · cites this paper as Liang et al., 2024
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“GitHub Copilot was the most widely used tool (74.6%), whose users reported that a median of 30.5% of their code was now generated by the AI assistant.”
From Echoes of AI: Investigating the downstream effects of AI assistants on software maintainability (2026) · cites this paper as Liang et al. (2024)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“Similarly, Liang et al. ( 2024) and Butler et al. (2025) found that developers generally feel productivity gains using the same assistant.”
From Echoes of AI: Investigating the downstream effects of AI assistants on software maintainability (2026) · cites this paper as Liang et al. (2024)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“Liang et al. [18] found that frustration occurs when the suggestions do not satisfy functional or non-functional requirements.”
From How do Copilot Suggestions Impact Developers' Frustration and Productivity? (2025) · cites this paper as Liang et al. [18]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Acceleration mode is usually preferred, as developers often use the tools to complete repetitive code that cannot be copy-pasted (Liang et al., 2024), and for recalling syntax they don't remember (Xu et al., 2022).”
From Understanding user mental models in AI-driven code completion tools: Insights from an elicitation study (2025) · cites this paper as Liang et al., 2024
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“The literature also highlights the need for explanations (such as reporting the source or linking to documentation) for additional context on the generated code (Liang et al., 2024; Xu et al., 2022).”
From Understanding user mental models in AI-driven code completion tools: Insights from an elicitation study (2025) · cites this paper as Liang et al., 2024
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“They also found that developers often do not use CCTs because these tools do not generate code that addresses certain functional or non-functional requirements, and because developers have trouble controlling the tool to generate the desired output.”
From Understanding user mental models in AI-driven code completion tools: Insights from an elicitation study (2025) · cites this paper as Liang et al., 2024
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“The survey revealed that developers are most motivated to use AI programming assistants because they help developers reduce keystrokes, finish programming tasks quickly, and recall syntax.”
From Understanding user mental models in AI-driven code completion tools: Insights from an elicitation study (2025) · cites this paper as Liang et al., 2024
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“On the other hand, the most common reasons for not using such tools were 1) that the code output often is of subpar quality, and 2) the difficulty of controlling the AI assistants to produce the desired output.”
From Echoes of AI: Investigating the downstream effects of AI assistants on software maintainability (2026) · cites this paper as Liang et al. (2024)
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“The primary motivations for adopting AI assistants were 1) reducing keystrokes, 2) completing tasks faster, and 3) skipping web searches for code examples.”
From Echoes of AI: Investigating the downstream effects of AI assistants on software maintainability (2026) · cites this paper as Liang et al. (2024)
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Five misunderstandings about case-study research
Flyvbjerg, B. (2006) · Qualitative Inquiry · doi:10.1177/1077800405284363 · Cited by 14,266
The Coding Manual for Qualitative Researchers
Lungu, M. (2022) · American Journal of Qualitative Research · doi:10.29333/ajqr/12085 · Cited by 10,936
McDonald, N., Schoenebeck, S., & Forte, A. (2019) · Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction · doi:10.1145/3359174 · Cited by 1,206
Power to the People: The Role of Humans in Interactive Machine Learning
Amershi, S., Cakmak, M., Knox, W. B., & Kulesza, T. (2014) · AI Magazine · doi:10.1609/aimag.v35i4.2513 · Cited by 1,084
Herbsleb, J. D., & Moitra, D. (2001) · IEEE Software · doi:10.1109/52.914732 · Cited by 1,059
Vaithilingam, P., Zhang, T., & Glassman, E. L. (2022) · CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems Extended Abstracts · doi:10.1145/3491101.3519665 · Cited by 660
Design lessons from the fastest q&a site in the west
Mamykina, L., Manoim, B., Mittal, M., Hripcsak, G. M., & Hartmann, B. (2011) · CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/1978942.1979366 · Cited by 574
A systematic evaluation of large language models of code
Xu, F. F., Alon, U., Neubig, G., & Hellendoorn, V. J. (2022) · Proceedings of the 6th ACM SIGPLAN International Symposium on Machine Programming · doi:10.1145/3520312.3534862 · Cited by 540
Kitchenham, B. A., & Pfleeger, S. L. (2007) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-1-84800-044-5_3 · Cited by 515
GitHub Copilot AI pair programmer: Asset or Liability?
Moradi Dakhel, A., Majdinasab, V., Nikanjam, A., Khomh, F., Desmarais, M. C., & Jiang, Z. M. (. (2023) · Journal of Systems and Software · doi:10.1016/j.jss.2023.111734 · Cited by 417
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 7
- 2023. Code faster with AI code completions | Tabnine. Retrieved March 11, 2023 from https://www.tabnine.com/.
- 2023. Prolific • Quickly find research participants you can trust. Retrieved September 2, 2023 from https://prolific.co/.
- Ruijia Cheng, Ruotong Wang, Thomas Zimmermann, and Denae Ford. 2022. "It would work for me too": How online communities shape software developers' trust in AI-powered code generation tools. arXiv preprint arXiv:2212.03491 (2022). · arXiv
- Victor Dibia, Adam Fourney, Gagan Bansal, Forough Poursabzi-Sangdeh, Han Liu, and Saleema Amershi. 2022. Aligning offline metrics and human judgments of value of AI-pair programmers. arXiv preprint arXiv:2210.16494 (2022). · arXiv
- 10.5555/3575618.3575622 · DOI
- Mohammad Tahaei and Kami Vaniea. 2022. Lessons Learned From Recruiting Participants With Programming Skills for Empirical Privacy and Security Studies. In International Workshop on Recruiting Participants for Empirical Software Engineering (RoPES).
- Ashish Vaswani, Noam Shazeer, Niki Parmar, Jakob Uszkoreit, Llion Jones, Aidan N Gomez, Łukasz Kaiser, and Illia Polosukhin. 2017. Attention is all you need. Advances in neural information processing systems 30 (2017).
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Items 101–200 of 215
Gan, X., Liang, H., & Brown, C. (2025) · IEEE International Conference on Software Testing, Verification and Validation (ICST) · doi:10.1109/icst62969.2025.10988972 · Cited by 5
TerzoN: Human-in-the-Loop Software Testing with a Composite Oracle
Davis, M. C., Wei, A., Myers, B. A., & Sunshine, J. (2025) · Proceedings of the ACM on software engineering. · doi:10.1145/3729359 · Cited by 3
Self-citationAssessment on the Effectiveness of GitHub Copilot as a Code Assistance Tool: An Empirical Study
Gonçalves, C., & Gonçalves, C. T. (2024) · Lecture notes in computer science · doi:10.1007/978-3-031-73503-5_3 · Cited by 5
Li, H., Bezemer, C., & Hassan, A. E. (2025) · IEEE/ACM International Conference on Software Engineering: Software Engineering in Practice (ICSE-SEIP) · doi:10.1109/icse-seip66354.2025.00033 · Cited by 12
Stalnaker, T., Wintersgill, N., Chaparro, O., Heymann, L. A., Tufo, M., Germán, D. M., & Poshyvanyk, D. (2025) · SSRN Electronic Journal · doi:10.2139/ssrn.5353252 · Cited by 3
Protecting the Whisper: A Security Assessment of Amazon CodeWhisperer’s Generated Code
Araujo, G. F., & Hayajneh, T. S. (2025) · Communications in computer and information science · doi:10.1007/978-3-031-85856-7_36 · Cited by 3
Katzy, J., Huang, Y., Panchu, G.-R., Ziemlewski, M., Loizides, P., Vermeulen, S., Arie Van Deursen, A., & Izadi, M. (2025) · International Conference on Predictive Models in Software Engineering · doi:10.1145/3727582.3728683 · Cited by 6
WatchWithMe: LLM-Based Interactive Guided Watching of Review Videos
Chi, P., Hu, S.-P., Shi, L., Kraljic, T., Secor, J., Dong, T., Essa, I. A., & Cleron, M. (2025) · ACM Conference on Conversational User Interfaces (CUI) · doi:10.1145/3719160.3736624 · Cited by 5
An LLM Assistant for Software Project Onboarding
Larsen, K. R., Edvall, M., Ho-Quang, T., Dobslaw, F., & Jolak, R. (2025) · ACM Joint European Software Engineering Conference and Symposium on the Foundations of Software Engineering (ESEC/FSE) · doi:10.1145/3696630.3728719 · Cited by 2
AskGraph: A Dependency-Aware Code Assistant Powered by Code Graphs and LLM-Generated Cypher Queries
Yang, N., Reynolds, J., Prast, L., & Corvino, R. (2025) · IEEE International Conference on Software Maintenance (ICSM) · doi:10.1109/icsme64153.2025.00065 · Cited by 2
Li, R., Liang, P., Wang, Y., Cai, Y., Sun, W., & Li, Z. (2026) · ACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology · doi:10.1145/3798163 · Cited by 11
Si, J. J., Li, D., Wang, Q., Liu, A. W., Lin, X., Zhu, Y., Zhou, X., Wang, A. Y., & Wang, K. Y. (2026) · CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/3772318.3790366 · Cited by 4
On the Role and Impact of GenAI Tools in Software Engineering Education
Qin, Q., Santos, R. D. S., & Spinola, R. O. (2026) · ACM/IEEE International Conference on Software Engineering: Companion Proceedings (ICSE-Companion) · doi:10.1145/3786580.3786965 · Cited by 4
SynergyAI: A Human–AI Pair Programming Tool Based on Dataflow
Jiang, L., Yamaguchi, S., & Ahmadon, M. A. B. (2025) · Information · doi:10.3390/info16030178 · Cited by 3
ATHENA: A customizable LLM-based Code Completion Tool for Visual Studio Code
Desolda, G., Esposito, A., Greco, F., Tucci, C., Buono, P., & Piccinno, A. (2025) · ACM International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces (IUI) · doi:10.1145/3708557.3716357 · Cited by 3
Studying How Configurations Impact Code Generation in LLMs: The Case of ChatGPT
Donato, B., Mariani, L., Micucci, D., & Riganelli, O. (2025) · IEEE International Conference on Program Comprehension (ICPC) · doi:10.1109/icpc66645.2025.00055 · Cited by 15
AI support for data scientists: An empirical study on workflow and alternative code recommendations
Ramasamy, D., Sarasua, C., & Bernstein, A. (2025) · Empirical Software Engineering · doi:10.1007/s10664-025-10622-4 · Cited by 3
Trust, Usefulness, and Dependency on AI in Programming: A Hierarchical Clustering Approach
Hernandez, H. E., Canlas, R. B., Nacianceno, M. C. B., Salenga, J. L., Yambao, J. A., Grume, J. C., Leon, A. P. D., Pampo, F. R., & Miranda, J. P. P. (2025) · International Conference on Computer Science and Technologies in Education (CSTE) · doi:10.1109/cste64638.2025.11091837 · Cited by 4
Generalized Adversarial Code-Suggestions: Exploiting Contexts of LLM-based Code-Completion
Rubel, K., Noppel, M., & Wressnegger, C. (2025) · ACM Asia Conference on Computer and Communications Security (ASIA CCS) · doi:10.1145/3708821.3733870 · Cited by 3
Towards Decoding Developer Cognition in the Age of AI Assistants
Haque, E. A., Brown, C., LaToza, T. D., & Johnson, B. (2025) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2501.02684 · Cited by 1
Self-Admitted GenAI Usage in Open-Source Software
Xiao, T., Fan, Y., Calefato, F., Treude, C., Kula, R. G., Hata, H., & Baltes, S. (2026) · IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering · doi:10.1109/tse.2026.3681886 · Cited by 1
Salomon, M., Chin, K. D., Holmes, R., Fritz, T., & Murphy, G. C. (2025) · ACM SIGPLAN International Symposium on SPLASH-E (SPLASH-E) · doi:10.1145/3758317.3759680 · Cited by 3
Budihartanto, J., Julianto, G. D., Manalu, S. R., & Shiddiqi, H. A. (2025) · Procedia Computer Science · doi:10.1016/j.procs.2025.09.026 · Cited by 2
"Maybe We Need Some More Examples:" Individual and Team Drivers of Developer GenAI Tool Use
Miller, C., Choudhuri, R., Ulloa, M., Haniyur, S., DeLine, R. A., Storey, M.-A., Murphy-Hill, E. R., Bird, C., & Butler, J. (2026) · ACM/IEEE International Conference on Software Engineering: Companion Proceedings (ICSE-Companion) · doi:10.1145/3744916.3773155 · Cited by 13
AI-Augmented Tangible Programming: Extending Tangible-MakeCode for Creative Learning
Yu, J. (2026) · International Conference on Tangible, Embedded, and Embodied Interaction (TEI) · doi:10.1145/3731459.3779040 · Cited by 1
Programming by Chat: A Large-Scale Behavioral Analysis of 11,579 Real-World AI-Assisted IDE Sessions
Tang, N., Chen, C., Fang, Z., Xu, G., Dhakal, M., Shi, Y., McMillan, C., Huang, Y., & Li, T. J.-J. (2026) · IEEE/ACM International Conference on Automated Software Engineering (ASE) · doi:10.1145/3832783.3834377 · Cited by 21
When Help Hurts: Verification Load and Fatigue with AI Coding Assistants
Fan, G. F., Liu, D., Pan, L., & Zhang, R. (2026) · CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/3772318.3791176 · Cited by 6
Gu, K., Palani, S., & Setlur, V. (2026) · CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/3772318.3790802 · Cited by 4
Are We Automating the Joy Out of Work? Designing AI to Augment Work, Not Meaning
Ranjit, J., Zhou, K., Swayamdipta, S., & Quercia, D. (2026) · CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/3772318.3791845 · Cited by 6
A Design Space for Live Music Agents
Kim, Y., Brade, S., Wang, A., Zhou, D., Kim, H., Wang, B., Lee, S.-J., García, H. F., Huang, A., & Donahue, C. (2026) · CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/3772318.3791291 · Cited by 4
Adoption of AI Assisted Coding – Cognitive Barriers, Motivational Factors and Productivity Gains
Varanasi, D. S., Reddy, Y. D., Potdar, S., & Warudkar, H. (2026) · Innovations in Software Engineering Conference (ISEC) · doi:10.1145/3796563.3796601 · Cited by 2
IntentFlow: Investigating Fluid Dynamics of Intent Communication in Generative AI
Kim, Y., Son, K., Kim, S., Chin, B., & Kim, J. (2026) · Designing Interactive Systems Conference · doi:10.1145/3800645.3812999 · Cited by 9
How Do Developers Interact with AI? An Exploratory Study on Modeling Developer Programming Behavior
Wu, Y., Li, Z. S., Stolee, K. T., & Xu, B. (2026) · Proceedings of the ACM on software engineering. · doi:10.1145/3808120 · Cited by 2
Vutla, P. C., & Yenugu, T. (2026) · American Journal of Information Science and Technology · doi:10.11648/j.ajist.20261002.11 · Cited by 1
A Longitudinal Analysis of Software Development Evolution in a Financial Organization
Chen, W., Zhang, Z., Yu, H., Fan, G., Wang, H., & Zhi, K. (2026) · IEEE/ACM International Conference on Automated Software Engineering (ASE) · doi:10.1145/3832783.3834515
Beyond the Commit: Developer Perspectives on Productivity with AI Coding Assistants
Chen, V., He, J., Williams, B., Valentino, J., & Talwalkar, A. (2026) · IEEE/ACM International Conference on Software Engineering: Software Engineering in Practice (ICSE-SEIP) · doi:10.1145/3786583.3786848 · Cited by 7
Towards Identifying Code Proficiency Through the Analysis of Python Textbooks
Rojpaisarnkit, R., Robles, G., Kula, R. G., Wang, D., Ragkhitwetsagul, C., Gonzalez-Barahona, J. M., & Matsumoto, K. (2024) · IEEE International Conference on Software Maintenance (ICSM) · doi:10.1109/icsme58944.2024.00035 · Cited by 1
Developers’ Views on Commercial Involvement in OSS: A Survey From Three Projects
Qin, M., Zhang, Y., Zhou, M., Wang, Z., Li, H., & Liu, H. (2025) · IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering · doi:10.1109/tse.2025.3568056 · Cited by 2
The Software Librarian: Python Package Insights for Copilot
Latendresse, J., Day, N., Khatoonabadi, S., & Shihab, E. (2025) · ACM/IEEE International Conference on Software Engineering: Companion Proceedings (ICSE-Companion) · doi:10.1109/icse-companion66252.2025.00014 · Cited by 3
From Disruptions to Discussions: How GenAI Impacts Human Interactions in Software Development
Salomon, M., Koshchenko, E., Sergeyuk, A., Holmes, R., Murphy, G. C., & Fritz, T. (2026) · IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering · doi:10.1109/tse.2026.3655626 · Cited by 1
Echoes of AI: Investigating the downstream effects of AI assistants on software maintainability
Borg, M., Hewett, D., Hagatulah, N., Couderc, N., Söderberg, E., Graham, D., Kini, U., & Farley, D. (2026) · Empirical Software Engineering · doi:10.1007/s10664-026-10889-1 · Cited by 4
How do Copilot Suggestions Impact Developers' Frustration and Productivity?
Guglielmi, E., Arnoudova, V., Bavota, G., Oliveto, R., & Scalabrino, S. (2025) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2504.06808 · Cited by 1
“Prather et al. [11] show that developers are frustrated by incorrect or overly large suggestions that interrupt their workflow, while Liang et al. [18] found that frustration occurs when the suggestions do not satisfy functional or non-functional requirements.”
Pelatihan “The Fundamental of Smart Programming” PKBM Bina Karya Semarang
Gamayanto, I., Haryanto, H., & Novianto, S. (2024) · ABDIMASKU JURNAL PENGABDIAN MASYARAKAT · doi:10.62411/ja.v7i2.1759
Test Case Features as Hyper-heuristics for Inductive Programming
McDaid, E., & McDaid, S. (2024) · IFIP advances in information and communication technology · doi:10.1007/978-3-031-63219-8_27
Wivestad, V. T., & Ulfsnes, R. (2025) · Lecture notes in business information processing · doi:10.1007/978-3-031-72781-8_5
Pimenov, A., & Kovalchuk, S. V. (2025) · Lecture notes in computer science · doi:10.1007/978-3-031-78459-0_25
Introducing AI Code Generators in Agile Software Testing
Nidagundi, P., Jurenoks, A., Bevinamarad, P., & Bulla, C. M. (2025) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-981-97-9132-3_1
Evaluating AI-Based Unit Testing Tools: A Focus on Usability, Reliability, and Integration
Aarifeen, H., & Wickramaarachchi, D. (2025) · International Conference on Advanced Research in Computing (ICARC) · doi:10.1109/icarc64760.2025.10963099
Swaraj, A., Kumar, S., & Sharma, L. M. (2025) · Computer · doi:10.1109/mc.2025.3532347 · Cited by 1
AI Assistance Variants in Software Development Cycles
Bakke, C., Clauss, J., Voita, E., & Callahan, M. J. (2025) · Issues in Informing Science and Information Technology · doi:10.28945/5539
ChatGPT for Coding: User Insights and Challenges in Program Generation
Talib, M. W. A., Bettayeb, A. M., Altayasinah, A. Z. S., & Dakalbab, F. M. (2025) · International Wireless Communications and Mobile Computing Conference (IWCMC) · doi:10.1109/iwcmc65282.2025.11059508
Trust, Support, and Adoption Intentions Towards Generative AI are Context Dependent
Liew, K., Wu, X., & Zhang, Z. (2025) · IEEE Conference on Artificial Intelligence (CAI) · doi:10.1109/cai64502.2025.00051
Catal, M. (2025) · ACM Joint European Software Engineering Conference and Symposium on the Foundations of Software Engineering (ESEC/FSE) · doi:10.1145/3696630.3731473
The New Era of Artificial Intelligence
Martinez, J. A. (2025) · Advances in computational intelligence and robotics book series · doi:10.4018/979-8-3373-5097-4.ch005
Guild Based Online Coding Platform with Gamification Features
Savitha, N. J., Naik, L. M., Mugilan, C., Rajesh, P., & Revankar, S. S. (2025) · Global Conference in Emerging Technology (GINOTECH) · doi:10.1109/ginotech63460.2025.11077053 · Cited by 2
Determining Code Proficiency Levels from Python Textbooks
Rojpaisarnkit, R., Robles, G., Gonzalez-Barahona, J. M., Matsumoto, K., & Kula, R. G. (2025) · ACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology · doi:10.1145/3769864 · Cited by 1
How Can Copilot Assist in Creating Accessible Websites? An Empirical Study
Teran, L. A., da Rocha, T. A., da Silva, I. M. M., de Salles, R. B., Melo, G. L. N., Mota, M. P., & de Souza, C. R. B. (2025) · Simpósio Brasileiro de Fatores Humanos em Sistemas Computacionais (IHC) · doi:10.5753/ihc.2025.10811
Kim, J., & Yim, J. (2025) · Journal of Digital Contents Society · doi:10.9728/dcs.2025.26.10.2683
Ju, M., Jun, H. K., Kim, T., & Kim, H.-J. (2025) · IEEE Pacific Rim International Symposium on Dependable Computing (PRDC) · doi:10.1109/prdc67299.2025.00026
Hyun, S., Kim, H., Jang, J., Choi, H., & Babar, M. A. (2026) · ACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology · doi:10.1145/3844949
MACEDON : Supporting Programmers with Real-Time Multi-Dimensional Code Evaluation and Optimization
Liu, X., You, Y., Qiu, X., Ma, T., & Zhao, J. (2025) · ACM Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology (UIST) · doi:10.1145/3746059.3747655
Software Vulnerability Management in the Era of Artificial Intelligence: An Industry Perspective
Kholoosi, M. M., Le, T. H. M., & Babar, M. A. (2026) · ACM/IEEE International Conference on Software Engineering: Companion Proceedings (ICSE-Companion) · doi:10.1145/3744916.3787781 · Cited by 1
Jin, H., & Hamdaqa, M. (2025) · International Conference on Evaluation and Assessment in Software Engineering (EASE) · doi:10.1145/3756681.3756954 · Cited by 1
Unveiling Ruby: Insights from Stack Overflow and Developer Survey
Akbarpour, N., MIRZA, A. S., Raoofian, E., Fard, F. H., & Rodríguez-Pérez, G. (2025) · International Conference on Evaluation and Assessment in Software Engineering (EASE) · doi:10.1145/3756681.3756955 · Cited by 5
Towards Trustworthy AI-Assisted Software Development
Haque, E. A. (2025) · IEEE Symposium on Visual Languages and Human-Centric Computing (VL/HCC) · doi:10.1109/vl-hcc65237.2025.00062 · Cited by 1
Exploring Large Language Models for Analyzing and Improving Method Names in Scientific Code
Larsen, G., Wong, C., & Peruma, A. (2025) · Proceedings of the ... ACM-IEEE International Symposium on Empirical Software Engineering and Measurement/International Symposium on Empirical Software Engineering and Measurement · doi:10.1109/esem64174.2025.00030
Assessing Indonesia's Readiness for Agentic Coding Adoption in Transforming Software Development
Rosadi, C. L., Tandra, T. E., Ningtji, N. K., & Gui, A. (2025) · International Conference on Information Technology and Digital Applications (ICITDA) · doi:10.1109/icitda68167.2025.11332391
Lumen: Developer Agency Through Transparent Context Control in AI-Assisted Programming
Goel, N., & Melo, G. (2025) · IEEE International Conference on Collaborative Advances in Software and Computing (CASCON) · doi:10.1109/cascon66301.2025.00024
Matejić, T., Mihailović, Đ., & Dukić, A. (2025) · Limes plus. · doi:10.69899/limes-plus25222046m
Yurko, M. (2026) · Universal Library of Innovative Research and Studies · doi:10.70315/uloap.ulirs.2026.0301009
Die nächste Generation datengetriebener Unternehmensentscheidungen
Moll, S., & Fechir-Oertel, G. A. (2026) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-658-46399-1_114-1
State of the Art of the Security of Code Generated by LLMs: A Multivocal Literature Review
Ramírez, L. C., Limón, X., Sanchéz-García, Á. J., & Pérez-Arriaga, J. C. (2025) · Programming and Computer Software · doi:10.1134/s0361768825700446 · Cited by 1
Artificial Intelligence Tools in Web Application Development – Advantages and Challenges
Sulova, S. (2025) · International Conference on Intelligent Computing and Next Generation Networks (ICNGN) · doi:10.1109/icngn67480.2025.11413758 · Cited by 1
When Pair Programming Gets Emotional: A Case Study of What LLMs Still Miss
Rahman, R. R., Kang, S. P., Jang, S. J., Lee, S., Cho, C., & Damevski, K. (2026) · International Journal of Software Engineering and Knowledge Engineering · doi:10.1142/s0218194026500294
Toward Agentic Coding: Designing for Habit Formation in AI-Assisted Data Work
Konagai, N., Lynn, M. T., & Snee, E. (2026) · CHI Conference Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI EA) · doi:10.1145/3772363.3799043
Everyday Practitioner Experiences of AI-First Policies Adopted by U.S. Big Tech Companies
Jeong, K. J., Zhang, Z., Dong, J., Chung, A., & Shih, P. C. (2026) · CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/3772318.3791271 · Cited by 1
From Assistants to Competitors
Smith, M., Houghton, L., Riverola, C., & Intezari, A. H. (2026) · Advances in computational intelligence and robotics book series · doi:10.4018/406748
Die nächste Generation datengetriebener Unternehmensentscheidungen
Moll, S., & Fechir-Oertel, G. A. (2026) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-658-49581-7_114
Белинская, И. В., & Смолякова, А. А. (2026) · Социально-гуманитарные исследования: векторы развития науки и образования · doi:10.21202/978-5-8399-0894-9_396-400
Introducing Molecular Simulation into Undergraduate Numerical Computation Education
Lv, J. Z., Chen, Y., & Zhou, C. (2026) · Journal of Chemical Education · doi:10.1021/acs.jchemed.5c01808
Yazılım Mühendisliği Eğitiminde Üretken Yapay Zekânın Bibliyometrik Analiz Yöntemi ile İncelenmesi
Baz, F. Ç., & Keleş, Ş. (2026) · Osmaniye Korkut Ata Üniversitesi Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü Dergisi · doi:10.47495/okufbed.1766554
Yeşilyayla, H. (2026) · Journal of Business Innovation and Governance · doi:10.54472/jobig.1921341
Understanding and Predicting Accepted Code Suggestions in AI-Assisted Programming
Jiang, J., Li, L., Hou, J., Tan, X. L., & Zhang, L. (2026) · Proceedings of the ACM on software engineering. · doi:10.1145/3808125
Unveiling AI-Driven Web Applications: Insights into Characteristics, Functionality, and Compliance
Wan, L., Liu, Z., Yan, C., Wan, L., Dong, N., Huang, Z. H., & Bai, G. (2026) · Proceedings of the ACM on software engineering. · doi:10.1145/3808168
The Ghost in the Machine: AI in Software Ecosystems
Bosch, J., & Olsson, H. H. (2026) · ACM/IEEE International Workshop on Software-intensive Business (IWSiB) · doi:10.1145/3786158.3788560
Generative AI and the Future of Professional Software Development: Survey Findings from Finland
Määttä, S., Kelanti, M., & Turhan, B. (2026) · ACM Joint European Software Engineering Conference and Symposium on the Foundations of Software Engineering (ESEC/FSE) · doi:10.1145/3803437.3805619 · Cited by 1
Shh! Don't Tell Them I Use GenAI: Exploring How Participants Use Generative AI in Hackathons
Acharya, P., Conte, T. U., Penney, J., Oliveira, P., Etchie, M. P., Duval, J., Gadelha, B., Gerosa, M. A., & Steinmacher, I. (2026) · ACM Joint European Software Engineering Conference and Symposium on the Foundations of Software Engineering (ESEC/FSE) · doi:10.1145/3803437.3806711
Scaffolding Autocomplete: Improving Guidance for Learners using Generative Code Suggestions
Prather, J. E., MacNeil, S., Luxton-Reilly, A., Margulieux, L. E., Reeves, B. N., Denny, P. C., Leinonen, J., Homer, J., Nabid, R. A., & Rossetti, R. L. (2026) · ACM Conference on International Computing Education Research (ICER) · doi:10.1145/3765964.3811654
Gardella, N., Prather, J. E., Leinonen, J., Denny, P. C., Pettit, R., & Riggs, S. L. (2026) · ACM Conference on International Computing Education Research (ICER) · doi:10.1145/3765964.3811664
From Design to Code: Exploring LLM-Supported Workflows in Figma Dev Mode
Rajpal, S., & Riener, A. (2026) · Mensch und Computer (MuC) · doi:10.1145/3820253.3820266
Ashif, A. (2026) · IT Professional · doi:10.1109/mitp.2026.3701936
Decision-Makers’ Perceptions of Barriers to AI Coding Assistant Adoption—A Survey Study
Rzanny, P., Ochodek, M., & Staron, M. (2026) · Lecture notes in computer science · doi:10.1007/978-3-032-36590-3_12
Das, P., Reddy, Y. R., Potdar, S., & Warudkar, H. (2026) · Lecture notes in computer science · doi:10.1007/978-3-032-36590-3_28
Gadot, R., & Tsybulsky, D. (2026) · Education Sciences · doi:10.3390/educsci16091402
Human-Centered AI for Software Engineering
Tavantzis, T. (2026) · ACM/IEEE International Conference on Software Engineering: Companion Proceedings (ICSE-Companion) · doi:10.1145/3774748.3787664
EmbedCopilot-Bench: Evaluating Vision-Language Models for Hardware-Aware Embedded System Development
Yuan, D., Deng, Y., & Chen, H. (2026) · Lecture notes in computer science · doi:10.1007/978-3-032-37132-4_19
Views on Internal and External Validity in Empirical Software Engineering: 10 Years Later and Beyond
Mailach, A., Siegmund, J., Apel, S., & Siegmund, N. (2026) · ACM/IEEE International Conference on Software Engineering: Companion Proceedings (ICSE-Companion) · doi:10.1145/3744916.3764520
Software Development using Low-Code Platforms or AI-Assistants: A Case Study-based Comparison
Hofmann, L. S., Wieber, P., & Taentzer, G. (2026) · ACM/IEEE International Conference on Model Driven Engineering Languages and Systems (MODELS) · doi:10.1145/3822455.3830306
Nudging Software Developers Toward SOLID Practices Through a Persuasive IDE Plugin
Pribik, I., & Felfernig, A. (2026) · Communications in computer and information science · doi:10.1007/978-3-032-27235-5_11
Masi, A. D., Wang, C., & Moccozet, L. (2026) · Nordic Conference on Human-Computer Interaction · doi:10.1145/3829807.3829904
Metadata
- Authors
- Liang, J. T., Yang, C., & Myers, B. A.
- Affiliations
- Carnegie Mellon University (US)
- Venue
- Proceedings of the IEEE/ACM 46th International Conference on Software Engineering
- Publisher
- ACM
- Published
- 2024-02-06
- Pages
- 1-13
- ISSN
- 0270-5257 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W4391558520
- Cited by
- 203
- References
- 45
- Citations by year
- 2026: 68 · 2025: 92 · 2024: 42
- FWCI
- 76.92
- Type
- conference paper
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Locations
- ACM/IEEE International Conference on Software Engineering: Companion Proceedings (ICSE-Companion) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- arXiv (Cornell University) (cc-by)
- Funders
- National Science Foundation (1745016, 1856641, 2140739)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Software Engineering Research
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Software Engineering Techniques and Practices
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Human-Computer Interaction › Usability and User Interface Design
- Keywords
- GitHub Copilot, usability, developer practices, code completion, developer motivation, non-functional requirements, cognitive effort, tool control, large language models
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
