From Conversation to Contribution: Characterizing Coding Agent in Open-Source Software
On the map: LLM agents and tool use → Software engineering coding agents
Abstract (arXiv)
AI coding assistants such as GitHub Copilot and Cursor have evolved from code-suggestion tools into conversational collaborators, enabling vibe-coding workflows in which developers guide AI-generated code through natural-language dialogue. Although researchers have increasingly recognized the importance of AI coding agents and begun examining their impact on open-source development, a comprehensive understanding of how developers' chat-based interactions with AI relate to subsequent open-source development and collaboration remains limited. This hinders efforts to effectively design, evaluate, and govern AI-assisted open-source software development. To address this gap, we collected 13,360 AI conversation sessions comprising 79,172 user messages from 1,356 OSS repositories, linked them to repository development histories, and complemented this analysis with a targeted developer survey. We find heavier AI use in smaller, less mature, and less collaborative repositories. After AI adoption, projects tended to show more active contributors and lower contributor concentration (p < .001), although communication remained highly concentrated. Code Writing was the dominant chat purpose, and nearly all AI chat sessions were followed by subsequent commits. We find no broad deterioration in code-quality signals or pull request merging rates. However, developers perceive others' AI-generated code as harder to maintain than their own (p = .029) and view AI as lowering barriers to OSS contribution. While most developers (68%) are willing to share their chat, concerns remain around appearing incompetent, increasing reviewer burden, and exposing ideas to competitors. These findings provide a large-scale empirical characterization of AI-assisted OSS contribution and offer practical insights for designing and governing responsible vibe-coding practices in open-source development.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 7 Oct 2026). Placed in Software engineering coding agents, one of 16 directions in LLM agents and tool use. Builds on 22 of its 49 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 6 Jul 2026.
Builds on
22 of 49 references.
Closest ancestors · 8
Same direction, newest first
- 2026How Coding Agents Fail Their Users: A Large-Scale Analysis of Developer-Agent Misalignment in 20,574 Real-World Sessions28 May
- 2026Investigating Autonomous Agent Contributions in the Wild: Activity Patterns and Code Change over Time1 Apr
- 2026When AI Teammates Meet Code Review: Collaboration Signals Shaping the Integration of Agent-Authored Pull Requests23 Feb
- 2026Agentic Much? Adoption of Coding Agents on GitHub26 Jan
- 2026AI IDEs or Autonomous Agents? Measuring the Impact of Coding Agents on Software Development20 Jan
- 2025Speed at the Cost of Quality: How Cursor AI Increases Short-Term Velocity and Long-Term Complexity in Open-Source Projects6 Nov
- 2025Code with Me or for Me? How Increasing AI Automation Transforms Developer Workflows10 Jul
- 2024Large Language Model-Based Agents for Software Engineering: A Survey4 Sep
Other references · 14
- 2024A Survey on Large Language Models for Code Generationcited by 646
- 2021Asleep at the Keyboard? Assessing the Security of GitHub Copilot's Code Contributionscited by 417
- 2023The Impact of AI on Developer Productivity: Evidence from GitHub Copilotcited by 264
- 2023Large Language Models for Software Engineering: Survey and Open Problemscited by 178
- 2022GitHub Copilot AI pair programmer: Asset or Liability?cited by 150
- 2024Enhancing Code LLMs with Reinforcement Learning in Code Generation: A Surveycited by 82
- 2026Programming by Chat: A Large-Scale Behavioral Analysis of 11,579 Real-World AI-Assisted IDE Sessionscited by 12
- 2024The Impact of Generative AI on Collaborative Open-Source Software Development: Evidence from GitHub Copilotcited by 11
- 2024Generative AI for Pull Request Descriptions: Adoption, Impact, and Developer Interventionscited by 10
- 2022Understanding Skills for OSS Communities on GitHubcited by 9
- 2024Open-Source AI-based SE Tools: Opportunities and Challenges of Collaborative Software Learningcited by 4
- 2019PHANTOM: Curating GitHub for engineered software projects using time-series clusteringcited by 3
Built on by
Not cited yet.
Similar, not cited
Close in wording, no citation either way
- 2026On Autopilot? An Empirical Study of Human-AI Teaming and Review Practices in Open Source
- 2026SWE-chat: Coding Agent Interactions From Real Users in the Wild
- 2025On the Use of Agentic Coding: An Empirical Study of Pull Requests on GitHub
- 2026Are We All Using Agents the Same Way? An Empirical Study of Core and Peripheral Developers Use of Coding Agents
- 2026Decoupling Code Complexity from Newcomer Participation: A Causal Study of AI Coding Agent Adoption in OSS
- 2026How Developers Discuss Generative AI: A Longitudinal Study of the Visual Studio Code Community
- 2026Augmentation with Dilution: A Large-Scale Empirical Study of Human Contributor Ecosystems After AI Coding Agent Adoption
- 2026A Task-Level Evaluation of AI Agents in Open-Source Projects