mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Exploring the Challenges and Opportunities of AI-assisted Codebase Generation

arXiv 2508.07966 ↗First posted 11 Aug 2025cs.SE cs.AIcited by 4

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Recent AI code assistants have significantly improved their ability to process more complex contexts and generate entire codebases based on a textual description, compared to the popular snippet-level generation. These codebase AI assistants (CBAs) can also extend or adapt codebases, allowing users to focus on higher-level design and deployment decisions. While prior work has extensively studied the impact of snippet-level code generation, this new class of codebase generation models is relatively unexplored. Despite initial anecdotal reports of excitement about these agents, they remain less frequently adopted compared to snippet-level code assistants. To utilize CBAs better, we need to understand how developers interact with CBAs, and how and why CBAs fall short of developers' needs. In this paper, we explored these gaps through a counterbalanced user study and interview with (n = 16) students and developers working on coding tasks with CBAs. We found that participants varied the information in their prompts, like problem description (48% of prompts), required functionality (98% of prompts), code structure (48% of prompts), and their prompt writing process. Despite various strategies, the overall satisfaction score with generated codebases remained low (mean = 2.8, median = 3, on a scale of one to five). Participants mentioned functionality as the most common factor for dissatisfaction (77% of instances), alongside poor code quality (42% of instances) and communication issues (25% of instances). We delve deeper into participants' dissatisfaction to identify six underlying challenges that participants faced when using CBAs, and extracted five barriers to incorporating CBAs into their workflows. Finally, we surveyed 21 commercial CBAs to compare their capabilities with participant challenges and present design opportunities for more efficient and useful CBAs.

Key facts. Cited by 4 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 33 of its 63 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 11 Aug 2025.

Builds on

33 of 63 references.

References · 33

  1. 2023SWE-bench: Can Language Models Resolve Real-World GitHub Issues?cited by 3,373
  2. 2023Tree of Thoughts: Deliberate Problem Solving with Large Language Modelscited by 3,211
  3. 2023Retrieval-Augmented Generation for Large Language Models: A Surveycited by 2,212
  4. 2023Is Your Code Generated by ChatGPT Really Correct? Rigorous Evaluation of Large Language Models for Code Generationcited by 1,391
  5. 2023Towards Understanding Sycophancy in Language Modelscited by 1,040
  6. 2024A Survey on Large Language Models for Code Generationcited by 658
  7. 2024LongRoPE: Extending LLM Context Window Beyond 2 Million Tokenscited by 313
  8. 2022Grounded Copilot: How Programmers Interact with Code-Generating Modelscited by 218
  9. 2023Self-planning Code Generation with Large Language Modelscited by 124
  10. 2024Make Your LLM Fully Utilize the Contextcited by 119
  11. 2022Productivity Assessment of Neural Code Completioncited by 98
  12. 2023LLMs for Knowledge Graph Construction and Reasoning: Recent Capabilities and Future Opportunitiescited by 97
21 more
  1. 2022Reading Between the Lines: Modeling User Behavior and Costs in AI-Assisted Programmingcited by 91
  2. 2024Unfamiliar Finetuning Examples Control How Language Models Hallucinatecited by 87
  3. 2024Self-Organized Agents: A LLM Multi-Agent Framework toward Ultra Large-Scale Code Generation and Optimizationcited by 84
  4. 2025A Self-Improving Coding Agentcited by 79
  5. 2023A Large-Scale Survey on the Usability of AI Programming Assistants: Successes and Challengescited by 75
  6. 2024Using AI-Based Coding Assistants in Practice: State of Affairs, Perceptions, and Ways Forwardcited by 45
  7. 2023Large Language Model-Aware In-Context Learning for Code Generationcited by 43
  8. 2023RepoFusion: Training Code Models to Understand Your Repositorycited by 40
  9. 2023ClarifyGPT: Empowering LLM-based Code Generation with Intention Clarificationcited by 38
  10. 2023The FormAI Dataset: Generative AI in Software Security Through the Lens of Formal Verificationcited by 34
  11. 2025Vibe coding: programming through conversation with artificial intelligencecited by 29
  12. 2024On the Impacts of Contexts on Repository-Level Code Generationcited by 22
  13. 2024STALL+: Boosting LLM-based Repository-level Code Completion with Static Analysiscited by 21
  14. 2024Just another copy and paste? Comparing the security vulnerabilities of ChatGPT generated code and StackOverflow answerscited by 13
  15. 2024Hierarchical Context Pruning: Optimizing Real-World Code Completion with Repository-Level Pretrained Code LLMscited by 13
  16. 2019Does Code Quality Affect Pull Request Acceptance? An empirical studycited by 9
  17. 2023Developer Experiences with a Contextualized AI Coding Assistant: Usability, Expectations, and Outcomescited by 9
  18. 2025CodeA11y: Making AI Coding Assistants Useful for Accessible Web Developmentcited by 8
  19. 2023Ethical Aspects of ChatGPT in Software Engineering Researchcited by 6
  20. 2018An Insight into the Pull Requests of GitHubcited by 4
  21. 2024How far are AI-powered programming assistants from meeting developers' needs?cited by 2

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 14 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2025: 2; 2026: 2.

4 papers.