mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

The Productivity-Reliability Paradox: Specification-Driven Governance for AI-Augmented Software Development

arXiv 2605.01160 ↗First posted 1 May 2026cs.SE cs.AIcited by 3

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Since 2022, AI-powered coding assistants have produced contradictory evidence: controlled studies report 20-56% productivity gains on well-scoped tasks, while the most rigorous RCT documents a 19% slowdown for experienced developers, and telemetry across 10,000+ developers shows 98% more pull requests but 91% longer review times with flat delivery metrics. This paper argues these findings constitute the Productivity-Reliability Paradox (PRP): a systematic phenomenon emerging from non-deterministic code generators and insufficient specification discipline. Through a multivocal literature review of 67 sources (2022-2026), this paper: (1) formally defines the PRP with three moderating variables (task abstraction, codebase maturity, developer experience) and two amplifying mechanisms (code review bottleneck, context window constraint); (2) proposes the AI-Augmented Methodology Taxonomy (AAMT), classifying six methodologies under three AI integration tiers; (3) introduces the Specification Governance Model (SGM), grounded in Transaction Cost Economics, with a practical governance decision guide; and (4) evaluates Spec Kit and TDAD as SGM instantiations via a four-month pilot study. Specification discipline, not model capability, is the binding constraint on AI-assisted software dependability.

Key facts. Cited by 3 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 21 of its 65 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 1 May 2026.

Builds on

21 of 65 references.

References · 21

  1. 2021Evaluating Large Language Models Trained on Codecited by 8,320
  2. 2023The Impact of AI on Developer Productivity: Evidence from GitHub Copilotcited by 274
  3. 2022Grounded Copilot: How Programmers Interact with Code-Generating Modelscited by 218
  4. 2022GitHub Copilot AI pair programmer: Asset or Liability?cited by 152
  5. 2025Measuring the Impact of Early-2025 AI on Experienced Open-Source Developer Productivitycited by 101
  6. 2024How much does AI impact development speed? An enterprise-based randomized controlled trialcited by 20
  7. 2023From Copilot to Pilot: Towards AI Supported Software Developmentcited by 14
  8. 2026Spec-Driven Development:From Code to Contract in the Age of AI Coding Assistantscited by 14
  9. 2025Inference economics of language modelscited by 9
  10. 2024Comprehensive Evaluation and Insights into the Use of Large Language Models in the Automation of Behavior-Driven Development Acceptance Test Formulationcited by 7
  11. 2026Test-Driven AI Agent Definition (TDAD): Compiling Tool-Using Agents from Behavioral Specificationscited by 6
  12. 2026Evaluating LLM-Based 0-to-1 Software Generation in End-to-End CLI Tool Scenarioscited by 5
9 more
  1. 2025The Impact of LLM-Assistants on Software Developer Productivity: A Systematic Review and Mapping Studycited by 4
  2. 2025Bias in the Loop: How Humans Evaluate AI-Generated Suggestionscited by 4
  3. 2026Scaling Test-Driven Code Generation from Functions to Classes: An Empirical Studycited by 4
  4. 2024Complement or substitute? How AI increases the demand for human skillscited by 3
  5. 2026Cognitive Biases in LLM-Assisted Software Developmentcited by 3
  6. 2026Human-AI Synergy in Agentic Code Reviewcited by 3
  7. 2026VibeContract: The Missing Quality Assurance Piece in Vibe Codingcited by 2
  8. 2026Tiered Super-Moore's Law: Price Evolution, Production Frontiers, and Market Competition in Large Language Model Inference Servicescited by 2
  9. 2026Behaviour Driven Development Scenario Generation with Large Language Modelscited by 1

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 14 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2026: 3.

3 papers.