mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Rethinking Technology Stack Selection with AI Coding Proficiency

arXiv 2509.11132 ↗First posted 14 Sep 2025cs.SEcited by 0

On the map: LLM reasoning → Reasoning for agents, planning and code

Abstract (arXiv)

Large language models (LLMs) are now an integral part of software development workflows and are reshaping the whole process. However, existing technology selection methods mainly focus on the inherent attributes of technologies, overlooking whether the LLM can effectively leverage the chosen technology. Therefore, teams using LLM assistants risk choosing technologies that cannot be used effectively by LLMs, yielding high debugging effort and mounting technical debt. We foresee a practical question in the LLM era, is a technology ready for AI-assisted development? In this paper, we first propose the concept, AI coding proficiency, the degree to which LLMs can utilize a given technology to generate high-quality code snippets. We then conduct the first large-scale empirical study examining AI coding proficiency across 170 third-party libraries and six LLMs. Our findings reveal that libraries with similar functionalities can exhibit up to 84% differences in the quality score of LLM-generated code. These gaps can be translated into real engineering costs and steer developer choices toward a narrow set of technologies, threatening technological diversity in the ecosystem. We call on the community to integrate AI coding proficiency into technology selection frameworks and develop mitigation strategies, preserving competitive balance in AI-driven development.

Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Placed in Reasoning for agents, planning and code, one of 17 directions in LLM reasoning. Builds on 11 of its 100 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 14 Sep 2025.

Builds on

11 of 100 references.

Closest ancestors · 2

Same direction, newest first

  1. 2025CodeCriticBench: A Holistic Code Critique Benchmark for Large Language Models23 Feb
  2. 2024Does Few-Shot Learning Help LLM Performance in Code Synthesis?3 Dec

Other references · 9

  1. 2025Qwen3 Technical Reportcited by 8,820
  2. 2021Evaluating Large Language Models Trained on Codecited by 8,320
  3. 2025DeepSeek-R1: Incentivizing Reasoning Capability in LLMs via Reinforcement Learningcited by 6,330
  4. 2021Program Synthesis with Large Language Modelscited by 3,637
  5. 2024A Survey on Large Language Models for Code Generationcited by 658
  6. 2024A Survey on Evaluating Large Language Models in Code Generation Taskscited by 44
  7. 2025EffiBench-X: A Multi-Language Benchmark for Measuring Efficiency of LLM-Generated Codecited by 27
  8. 2025A Study of LLMs' Preferences for Libraries and Programming Languagescited by 20
  9. 2025BigO(Bench): Can LLMs Generate Code with Controlled Time and Space Complexity?cited by 12

Built on by

Not cited yet.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2025Coding With AI: From a Reflection on Industrial Practices to Future Computer Science and Software Engineering Education
  2. 2025AI-Generated Code Is Not Reproducible (Yet): An Empirical Study of Dependency Gaps in LLM-Based Coding Agents
  3. 2025The Matthew Effect of AI Programming Assistants: A Hidden Bias in Software Evolution
  4. 2025Industrial LLM-based Code Optimization under Regulation: A Mixture-of-Agents Approach
  5. 2025"You Are Rejected!": An Empirical Study of Large Language Models Taking Hiring Evaluations
  6. 2025Application Modernization with LLMs: Addressing Core Challenges in Reliability, Security, and Quality
  7. 2026Do LLMs Favor Their Providers? Measuring Vertical Integration Bias in Code Generation
  8. 2026More Code, Less Reuse: Investigating Code Quality and Reviewer Sentiment towards AI-generated Pull Requests