REVIEW 1 cited by
How Scientists Use Large Language Models to Program
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
read the original abstract
Scientists across disciplines write code for critical activities like data collection and generation, statistical modeling, and visualization. As large language models that can generate code have become widely available, scientists may increasingly use these models during research software development. We investigate the characteristics of scientists who are early-adopters of code generating models and conduct interviews with scientists at a public, research-focused university. Through interviews and reviews of user interaction logs, we see that scientists often use code generating models as an information retrieval tool for navigating unfamiliar programming languages and libraries. We present findings about their verification strategies and discuss potential vulnerabilities that may emerge from code generation practices unknowingly influencing the parameters of scientific analyses.
Forward citations
Cited by 1 Pith paper
-
The Effects of GitHub Copilot on Computing Students' Programming Effectiveness, Efficiency, and Processes in Brownfield Programming Tasks
GitHub Copilot made undergraduate students faster and more test-successful on brownfield programming tasks, and shifted their workflow from manual coding and web search to prompting, reviewing, and integrating AI suggestions.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.