mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Investigating and Designing for Trust in AI-powered Code Generation Tools

arXiv 2305.11248 ↗First posted 18 May 2023cs.HC cs.SEcited by 34

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

As AI-powered code generation tools such as GitHub Copilot become popular, it is crucial to understand software developers' trust in AI tools -- a key factor for tool adoption and responsible usage. However, we know little about how developers build trust with AI, nor do we understand how to design the interface of generative AI systems to facilitate their appropriate levels of trust. In this paper, we describe findings from a two-stage qualitative investigation. We first interviewed 17 developers to contextualize their notions of trust and understand their challenges in building appropriate trust in AI code generation tools. We surfaced three main challenges -- including building appropriate expectations, configuring AI tools, and validating AI suggestions. To address these challenges, we conducted a design probe study in the second stage to explore design concepts that support developers' trust-building process by 1) communicating AI performance to help users set proper expectations, 2) allowing users to configure AI by setting and adjusting preferences, and 3) offering indicators of model mechanism to support evaluation of AI suggestions. We gathered developers' feedback on how these design concepts can help them build appropriate trust in AI-powered code generation tools, as well as potential risks in design. These findings inform our proposed design recommendations on how to design for trust in AI-powered code generation tools.

Key facts. Cited by 34 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). First posted on arXiv 18 May 2023.

Builds on

No reference list yet.

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2024: 8; 2025: 15; 2026: 11.

34 papers.

Sort:

By area:

  1. 2026Agentic Much? Adoption of Coding Agents on GitHubcited by 31
  2. 2024Artificial Intelligence for Literature Reviews: Opportunities and Challengescited by 30
  3. 2025A Study of LLMs' Preferences for Libraries and Programming Languagescited by 20
  4. 2025Professional Software Developers Don't Vibe, They Control: AI Agent Use for Coding in 2025cited by 17
  5. 2024BISCUIT: Scaffolding LLM-Generated Code with Ephemeral UIs in Computational Notebookscited by 12
  6. 2024Artificial-Intelligence Generated Code Considered Harmful: A Road Map for Secure and High-Quality Code Generationcited by 11
  7. 2024Towards More Trustworthy and Interpretable LLMs for Code through Syntax-Grounded Explanationscited by 10
  8. 2025The Impact of Generative AI Coding Assistants on Developers Who Are Visually Impairedcited by 7
  9. 2025Knowledge-Based Multi-Agent Framework for Automated Software Architecture Designcited by 7
  10. 2025Understanding AI Trustworthiness: A Scoping Review of AIES & FAccT Articlescited by 6
  11. 2026Promises, Perils, and (Timely) Heuristics for Mining Coding Agent Activitycited by 6
  12. 2026Human oversight of agentic systems in practice: Examining the oversight work, challenges, and heuristics of developers using software agentscited by 6
22 more
  1. 2024A Transformer-Based Approach for Smart Invocation of Automatic Code Completioncited by 5
  2. 2025Generative AI Uses and Risks for Knowledge Workers in a Science Organizationcited by 5
  3. 2025TableTalk: Scaffolding Spreadsheet Development with a Language Agentcited by 5
  4. 2025Human-AI Experience in Integrated Development Environments: A Systematic Literature Reviewcited by 5
  5. 2026Humans are Missing from AI Coding Agent Researchcited by 3
  6. 2024Envisioning the Next-Generation AI Coding Assistants: Insights & Proposalscited by 2
  7. 2025CodeWatcher: IDE Telemetry Data Extraction Tool for Understanding Coding Interactions with LLMscited by 2
  8. 2024Tadashi: Enabling AI-Based Automated Code Generation With Guaranteed Correctnesscited by 1
  9. 2024What You See Is Not Always What You Get: Evaluating GPT's Comprehension of Source Codecited by 1
  10. 2025Mapping Trustworthiness in Large Language Models: A Bibliometric Analysis Bridging Theory to Practicecited by 1
  11. 2026Rethinking Code Review in the Age of AI: A Vision for Agentic Code Reviewcited by 1
  12. 2025Mapping the Trust Terrain: LLMs in Software Engineering -- Insights and Perspectivescited by 0
  13. 2025Beyond Autocomplete: Designing CopilotLens Towards Transparent and Explainable AI Coding Agentscited by 0
  14. 2025Single Conversation Methodology: A Human-Centered Protocol for AI-Assisted Software Developmentcited by 0
  15. 2025Cracking CodeWhisperer: Analyzing Developers' Interactions and Patterns During Programming Taskscited by 0
  16. 2025Do You Trust the Process?: Modeling Institutional Trust for Community Adoption of Reinforcement Learning Policiescited by 0
  17. 2026Fine-grained Approaches for Confidence Calibration of LLMs in Automated Code Revisioncited by 0
  18. 2026Choose Your Own Adventure: Non-Linear AI-Assisted Programming with EvoGraphcited by 0
  19. 2026"So There's a Catch-22 Here": How Early Adopters Who Build Multi-Agent LLM Systems Conceptualize Transparencycited by 0
  20. 2026Assistant or Actor? Student Trust, Control, and Delegation Regret When Using a General-Purpose AI Agentcited by 0
  21. 2026Unaccountable Delegation, Fading Skills: Mapping the Risks of Workplace AI Agentscited by 0
  22. 2026AppLooper: An Agentic Application Engineering Loop for Accountable Release with Virtual-User Feedbackcited by 0