Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

An LLM's Attempts to Adapt to Diverse Software Engineers' Problem-Solving Styles: More Inclusive & Equitable?

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

arxiv 2503.11018 v1 pith:VTT4VE43 submitted 2025-03-14 cs.HC

classification cs.HC
keywords engineersproblem-solvingdiverseadaptationsexplanationssoftwareadaptmatched
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

Software engineers use code-fluent large language models (LLMs) to help explain unfamiliar code, yet LLM explanations are not adapted to engineers' diverse problem-solving needs. We prompted an LLM to adapt to five problem-solving style types from an inclusive design method, the Gender Inclusiveness Magnifier (GenderMag). We ran a user study with software engineers to examine the impact of explanation adaptations on software engineers' perceptions, both for explanations which matched and mismatched engineers' problem-solving styles. We found that explanations were more frequently beneficial when they matched problem-solving style, but not every matching adaptation was equally beneficial; in some instances, diverse engineers found as much (or more) benefit from mismatched adaptations. Through an equity and inclusivity lens, our work highlights the benefits of having an LLM adapt its explanations to match engineers' diverse problem-solving style values, the potential harms when matched adaptations were not perceived well by engineers, and a comparison of how matching and mismatching LLM adaptations impacted diverse engineers.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. From Generic to Personalized: Exploring Persona-Aware Code Review Explanations

    cs.SE 2026-07 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    Preliminary n=16 evidence suggests code-review explanation preferences vary by GenderMag persona, experience, and role, with depth and learning support valued over conciseness.

Pith tools