mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Mining Architectural Quality Under Agentic AI Adoption: A Causal Study of Java Repositories

arXiv 2606.13298 ↗First posted 11 Jun 2026cs.SE cs.AIcited by 1

On the map: LLM agents and tool use → Software engineering coding agents

Abstract (arXiv)

AI coding tools are now used by a majority of developers, and agentic use of these tools has popularized the practice colloquially called "vibe coding". Yet causal evidence on their effect on software architecture is scarce. Prior causal work has measured code-level outcomes (complexity, static analysis warnings); whether such degradation propagates to architecture-level outcomes remains unknown. We mine 151 open-source Java repositories, 74 with detectable agentic AI adoption (identified via configuration files and Co-Authored-By commit trailers) and 77 propensity-matched controls, across a 13-month per-repository window yielding 1,811 monthly Arcan snapshots. We estimate the causal effect of adoption on architectural smell density (ASD) with a staggered difference-in-differences design and the Borusyak imputation estimator, applying a causal design recently used for code-level metrics to the architecture level. Total smell counts are essentially unchanged (+1.1%, p = 0.82) while lines of code grow +12.8% (p = 0.003); the resulting 6.7% ASD decline (p = 0.004) is therefore a denominator effect rather than an architectural improvement. Per-type estimates and robustness checks (wild cluster bootstrap, Lee bounds, stale-observation sensitivity) corroborate the pattern; pre-trends are flat (Wald p = 0.90), consistent with parallel trends. Density-normalized outcomes can mislead when treatment affects system size: raw counts and explicit decomposition are required for causal mining studies of AI tool adoption. The complete replication package, including the curated 151-repository monthly panel, is publicly available.

Key facts. Cited by 1 paper in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Placed in Software engineering coding agents, one of 16 directions in LLM agents and tool use. Builds on 12 of its 39 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 11 Jun 2026.

Builds on

12 of 39 references.

Closest ancestors · 2

Same direction, newest first

  1. 2026AI IDEs or Autonomous Agents? Measuring the Impact of Coding Agents on Software Development20 Jan
  2. 2025Speed at the Cost of Quality: How Cursor AI Increases Short-Term Velocity and Long-Term Complexity in Open-Source Projects6 Nov

Other references · 10

  1. 2023Evaluating the Code Quality of AI-Assisted Code Generation Tools: An Empirical Study on GitHub Copilot, Amazon CodeWhisperer, and ChatGPTcited by 71
  2. 2025Vibe Coding in Practice: Motivations, Challenges, and a Future Outlook -- a Grey Literature Reviewcited by 30
  3. 2025Human-Written vs. AI-Generated Code: A Large-Scale Study of Defects, Vulnerabilities, and Complexitycited by 16
  4. 2025Software Architecture Meets LLMs: A Systematic Literature Reviewcited by 11
  5. 2025Beyond the Prompt: An Empirical Study of Cursor Rulescited by 7
  6. 2023An architectural technical debt index based on machine learning and architectural smellscited by 3
  7. 2024On the correlation between Architectural Smells and Static Analysis Warningscited by 3
  8. 2025The Impact of AI-Generated Solutions on Software Architecture and Productivity: Results from a Survey Studycited by 2
  9. 2025Vibe Coding in Practice: Flow, Technical Debt, and Guidelines for Sustainable Usecited by 2
  10. 2022On the evolution and impact of Architectural Smells -- An industrial case studycited by 1

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 14 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2026: 1.

1 paper.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2026AI builds, We Analyze: An Empirical Study of AI-Generated Build Code Quality
  2. 2026Augmentation with Dilution: A Large-Scale Empirical Study of Human Contributor Ecosystems After AI Coding Agent Adoption
  3. 2026Do These Violent Delights Have Violent Ends? Measuring the Post-Merge Fate of Agentic Code
  4. 2026A Few Pages of Markdown: Committed AI Configuration and Lower Quality Cost after Coding-Agent Adoption
  5. 2025Agentic Refactoring: An Empirical Study of AI Coding Agents
  6. 2026Agentic Agile-V: From Vibe Coding to Verified Engineering in Software and Hardware Development
  7. 2026How Do AI Coding Agents Contribute to Software Development? an Empirical Study of Agentic Pull Requests
  8. 2026Govern the Repository, Not the Agent: Measuring Ecosystem-Level Risk in AI-Native Software