REVIEW 1 cited by
Reading Between the Lines: Modeling User Behavior and Costs in AI-Assisted Programming
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
Code-recommendation systems, such as Copilot and CodeWhisperer, have the potential to improve programmer productivity by suggesting and auto-completing code. However, to fully realize their potential, we must understand how programmers interact with these systems and identify ways to improve that interaction. To seek insights about human-AI collaboration with code recommendations systems, we studied GitHub Copilot, a code-recommendation system used by millions of programmers daily. We developed CUPS, a taxonomy of common programmer activities when interacting with Copilot. Our study of 21 programmers, who completed coding tasks and retrospectively labeled their sessions with CUPS, showed that CUPS can help us understand how programmers interact with code-recommendation systems, revealing inefficiencies and time costs. Our insights reveal how programmers interact with Copilot and motivate new interface designs and metrics.
Forward citations
Cited by 1 Pith paper
-
Code Shaping: Iterative Code Editing with Free-form AI-Interpreted Sketching
Free-form sketch annotations on and around code can be interpreted by a large language model to produce iterative code edits, and a three-stage study with 18 programmers yields design guidelines for this interaction paradigm.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.