The DOI matches its DataCite record; 12 of the 12 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Productivity Assessment of Neural Code Completion
Open accessAbstract
Neural code synthesis has reached a point where snippet generation is accurate enough to be considered for integration into human software development workflows. Commercial products aim to increase programmers' productivity, without being able to measure it directly. In this case study, we asked users of GitHub Copilot about its impact on their productivity, and sought to find a reflection of their perception in directly measurable user data. We find that the rate with which shown suggestions are accepted, rather than more specific metrics regarding the persistence of completions in the code over time, drives developers' perception of productivity.
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
“Consistent with earlier research [32, 49], we acknowledge that these proxy metrics might not fully capture the usability of the interaction without potentially compromising it in some other way.”
From A Transformer-Based Approach for Smart Invocation of Automatic Code Completion (2024) · cites this paper as [49]
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
“Copilot's authors themselves reported that about two-thirds of shown completions are ignored by their end-user [49].”
From A Transformer-Based Approach for Smart Invocation of Automatic Code Completion (2024) · cites this paper as [49]
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
“Specifically, optimising only acceptance rate results in worse completions [32, 49].”
From A Transformer-Based Approach for Smart Invocation of Automatic Code Completion (2024) · cites this paper as [49]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Ziegler et al. [49] proposes the acceptance rate of suggestions as a proxy for developers' perceived productivity”
From A Transformer-Based Approach for Smart Invocation of Automatic Code Completion (2024) · cites this paper as Ziegler et al. [49]
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
PLS-regression: a basic tool of chemometrics
Wold, S., Sjöström, M., & Eriksson, L. (2001) · Chemometrics and Intelligent Laboratory Systems · doi:10.1016/s0169-7439(01)00155-1 · Cited by 10,084
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
IntelliCode compose: code generation using transformer
Svyatkovskiy, A., Deng, S. K., Fu, S., & Sundaresan, N. (2020) · Proceedings of the 28th ACM Joint Meeting on European Software Engineering Conference and Symposium on the Foundations of Software Engineering · doi:10.1145/3368089.3417058 · Cited by 474 · cited 1×
“The IntelliCode Compose system uses the term CTR (Click Through Rate) for this and reports a value of 10% in online trials [12].”
MethodWhat makes a good conversation? How controllable attributes affect human judgments
See, A., Roller, S., Kiela, D., & Weston, J. (2019) · Proceedings of the 2019 Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies, Volume 1 (Long and Short Papers) · doi:10.18653/v1/n19-1170 · Cited by 247
Best practices for the human evaluation of automatically generated text
van der Lee, C., Gatt, A., van Miltenburg, E., Wubben, S., & Krahmer, E. (2019) · Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Natural Language Generation · doi:10.18653/v1/w19-8643 · Cited by 205
The SPACE of Developer Productivity: There's more to it than you think.
Forsgren, N., Storey, M.-A., Maddila, C., Zimmermann, T., Houck, B., & Butler, J. (2021) · Queue · doi:10.1145/3454122.3454124 · Cited by 164
Perfection Not Required? Human-AI Partnerships in Code Translation
Weisz, J. D., Muller, M., Houde, S., Richards, J., Ross, S. I., Martinez, F., Agarwal, M., & Talamadupula, K. (2021) · 26th International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces · doi:10.1145/3397481.3450656 · Cited by 129
Fast and Memory-Efficient Neural Code Completion
Svyatkovskiy, A., Lee, S., Hadjitofi, A., Riechert, M., Franco, J. V., & Allamanis, M. (2021) · 2021 IEEE/ACM 18th International Conference on Mining Software Repositories (MSR) · doi:10.1109/msr52588.2021.00045 · Cited by 95
A Study of Visual Studio Usage in Practice
Amann, S., Proksch, S., Nadi, S., & Mezini, M. (2016) · 2016 IEEE 23rd International Conference on Software Analysis, Evolution, and Reengineering (SANER) · doi:10.1109/saner.2016.39 · Cited by 77
When Code Completion Fails: A Case Study on Real-World Completions
Hellendoorn, V. J., Proksch, S., Gall, H. C., & Bacchelli, A. (2019) · 2019 IEEE/ACM 41st International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE) · doi:10.1109/icse.2019.00101 · Cited by 76
Research works printed but not linked: 7
- Jacob Austin, Augustus Odena, Maxwell Nye, Maarten Bosma, Henryk Michalewski, David Dohan, Ellen Jiang, Carrie J. Cai, Michael Terry, Quoc V. Le, and Charles Sutton. 2021. Program Synthesis with Large Language Models. CoRR abs/2108.07732 (2021). arXiv:2108.07732 https://arxiv.org/abs/2108.07732 · arXiv
- Mark Chen, Jerry Tworek, Heewoo Jun, Qiming Yuan, Henrique Ponde de Oliveira Pinto, Jared Kaplan, Harrison Edwards, Yuri Burda, Nicholas Joseph, Greg Brockman, Alex Ray, Raul Puri, Gretchen Krueger, Michael Petrov, Heidy Khlaaf, Girish Sastry, Pamela Mishkin, Brooke Chan, Scott Gray, Nick Ryder, Mikhail Pavlov, Alethea Power, Lukasz Kaiser, Mohammad Bavarian, Clemens Winter, Philippe Tillet, Felipe Petroski Such, Dave Cummings, Matthias Plappert, Fotios Chantzis, Elizabeth Barnes, Ariel Herbert-Voss, William Hebgen Guss, Alex Nichol, Alex Paino, Nikolas Tezak, Jie Tang, Igor Babuschkin, Suchir Balaji, Shantanu Jain, William Saunders, Christopher Hesse, An- drew N. Carr, Jan Leike, Joshua Achiam, Vedant Misra, Evan Morikawa, Alec Radford, Matthew Knight, Miles Brundage, Mira Murati, Katie Mayer, Peter Welinder, Bob McGrew, Dario Amodei, Sam McCan- dlish, Ilya Sutskever, and Wojciech Zaremba. 2021. Evaluating Large Language Models Trained on Code. CoRR abs/2107.03374 (2021). arXiv:2107.03374 https://arxiv.org/abs/2107.03374 · arXiv
- Dan Hendrycks, Steven Basart, Saurav Kadavath, Mantas Mazeika, Akul Arora, Ethan Guo, Collin Burns, Samir Puranik, Horace He, Dawn Song, and Jacob Steinhardt. 2021. Measuring Coding Challenge Com- petence With APPS. CoRR abs/2105.09938 (2021). arXiv:2105.09938 https://arxiv.org/abs/2105.09938 · arXiv
- Sumith Kulal, Panupong Pasupat, Kartik Chandra, Mina Lee, Oded Padon, Alex Aiken, and Percy Liang. 2019. SPoC: Search-based Pseudocode to Code. In Advances in Neural Information Process- ing Systems 32: Annual Conference on Neural Information Process- ing Systems 2019, NeurIPS 2019, December 8-14, 2019, Vancouver, BC, Canada, Hanna M. Wallach, Hugo Larochelle, Alina Beygelz- imer, Florence d'Alché-Buc, Emily B. Fox, and Roman Garnett (Eds.). 11883ś11894. https://proceedings.neurips.cc/paper/2019/hash/ 7298332f04ac004a0ca44cc69ecf6f6b-Abstract.html
- Priyan Vaithilingam, Tianyi Zhang, and Elena Glassman. 2022. Ex- pectation vs. Experience: Evaluating the Usability of Code Generation Tools Powered by Large Language Models. In CHI '22 Late-Breaking Work: Proceedings of the 2022 Conference on Human Factors in Comput- ing Systems.
- Frank F. Xu, Bogdan Vasilescu, and Graham Neubig. 2021. In-IDE Code Generation from Natural Language: Promise and Challenges. CoRR abs/2101.11149 (2021). arXiv:2101.11149 https://arxiv.org/abs/ 2101.11149 · arXiv
- Wen Zhou, Seohyun Kim, Vijayaraghavan Murali, and Gareth Ari Aye. 2021. Improving Code Autocompletion with Transfer Learning. CoRR abs/2105.05991 (2021). arXiv:2105.05991 https://arxiv.org/abs/2105. 05991 · arXiv
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Items 201–201 of 201
A Transformer-Based Approach for Smart Invocation of Automatic Code Completion
de Moor, A., van Deursen, A., & Izadi, M. (2024) · arXiv
Metadata
- Authors
- Ziegler, A., Kalliamvakou, E., Simister, S., Sittampalam, G., Li, A., Rice, A., Rifkin, D., & Aftandilian, E.
- Venue
- arXiv
- Publisher
- arXiv
- Published
- 2022
- Pages
- 21-29
- arXiv
- 2205.06537
- OpenAlex
- W4281669078
- Cited by
- 200
- References
- 12
- Citations by year
- 2026: 47 · 2025: 56 · 2024: 70 · 2023: 25 · 2022: 2
- FWCI
- 34.20
- Type
- conference paper
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
- arXiv (Cornell University) (cc-by)
- Funders
- Microsoft Research
- 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 › Computer Science Applications › Open Source Software Innovations
- Keywords
- GitHub Copilot, developer productivity, code completion, developer perceptions, code generation
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
