mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

AgenTag: Attribution of AI Coding Agents from Behavioral Fingerprints

arXiv 2608.00966 ↗First posted 2 Aug 2026cs.SEcited by 0

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

Abstract (arXiv)

AI coding agents increasingly author pull requests (PRs), often under developers' own accounts, obscuring who actually produced a change. Reliable attribution is important for repository governance, empirical studies of AI-assisted software development, and measuring the impact of AI coding agents. Existing work focuses on closed-set identification of known agents, leaving the practical limits of open-world AI coding agent attribution largely unexplored. In this paper, we present AgenTag, a multimodal framework for open-world AI coding agent attribution, evaluated on AIDev, comprising 33,580 PRs from five AI coding agents and 6,618 human-authored PRs. We represent each PR using textual, behavioral, and code-based modalities, and compare conventional classification with supervised contrastive learning for open-set recognition and few-shot enrollment of previously unseen agents. AgenTag identifies authoring agents with a weighted F1 of 0.96 (macro F1 of 0.84), distinguishes AI- from human-authored PRs with a balanced F1 of 0.89, and detects previously unseen agents with an AUC of 0.84. We further show that PR descriptions and commit messages provide nearly all of the attribution signal, whereas code diffs contribute little across multiple representations, indicating that coding agents are distinguished primarily by how they communicate changes rather than by the code they generate. Moreover, these behavioral fingerprints persist after removing explicit self-disclosed markers, demonstrating that attribution relies largely on latent stylistic characteristics. These findings show that reliable attribution of AI coding agents is feasible and clarify the practical trade-offs between attribution accuracy and the information required to achieve it.

Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Placed in Software engineering coding agents, one of 16 directions in LLM agents and tool use. Builds on 25 of its 51 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 2 Aug 2026.

Builds on

25 of 51 references.

Closest ancestors · 9

Same direction, newest first

  1. 2026How AI Coding Agents Communicate: A Study of Pull Request Description Characteristics and Human Review Responses19 Feb
  2. 2026Comparing AI Coding Agents: A Task-Stratified Analysis of Pull Request Acceptance9 Feb
  3. 2026Agentic Much? Adoption of Coding Agents on GitHub26 Jan
  4. 2026Code Change Characteristics and Description Alignment: A Comparative Study of Agentic versus Human Pull Requests24 Jan
  5. 2026How AI Coding Agents Modify Code: A Large-Scale Study of GitHub Pull Requests24 Jan
  6. 2026Fingerprinting AI Coding Agents on GitHub24 Jan
  7. 2026Where Do AI Coding Agents Fail? An Empirical Study of Failed Agentic Pull Requests in GitHub21 Jan
  8. 2026Analyzing Message-Code Inconsistency in AI Coding Agent-Authored Pull Requests8 Jan
  9. 2026Security in the Age of AI Teammates: An Empirical Study of Agentic Pull Requests on GitHub1 Jan

Other references · 16

  1. 2019PyTorch: An Imperative Style, High-Performance Deep Learning Librarycited by 20,305
  2. 2019Sentence-BERT: Sentence Embeddings using Siamese BERT-Networkscited by 9,170
  3. 2017A Unified Approach to Interpreting Model Predictionscited by 6,555
  4. 2016XGBoost: A Scalable Tree Boosting Systemcited by 5,166
  5. 2017Prototypical Networks for Few-shot Learningcited by 3,015
  6. 2015FaceNet: A Unified Embedding for Face Recognition and Clusteringcited by 2,849
  7. 2020Supervised Contrastive Learningcited by 2,829
  8. 2020CodeBERT: A Pre-Trained Model for Programming and Natural Languagescited by 1,310
  9. 2022Grounded Copilot: How Programmers Interact with Code-Generating Modelscited by 218
  10. 2023Is ChatGPT the Ultimate Programming Assistant -- How far is it?cited by 76
  11. 2025Exposing LLM User Privacy via Traffic Fingerprint Analysis: A Study of Privacy Risks in LLM Agent Interactionscited by 10
  12. 2020Authorship Attribution of Source Code: A Language-Agnostic Approach and Applicability in Software Engineeringcited by 9
4 more
  1. 2025I Know Which LLM Wrote Your Code Last Summer: LLM generated Code Stylometry for Authorship Attributioncited by 9
  2. 2026When AI Agents Touch CI/CD Configurations: Frequency and Successcited by 3
  3. 2025Reassessing Code Authorship Attribution in the Era of Language Modelscited by 2
  4. 2026Bridging Behavioral Biometrics and Source Code Stylometry: A Survey of Programmer Attributioncited by 1

Built on by

Not cited yet.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2026Investigating Autonomous Agent Contributions in the Wild: Activity Patterns and Code Change over Time
  2. 2026Detecting AI Coding Agents in Open Source: A Validated Multi-Method Census of 180 Million Repositories
  3. 2025On the Use of Agentic Coding: An Empirical Study of Pull Requests on GitHub
  4. 2026How Do AI Coding Agents Contribute to Software Development? an Empirical Study of Agentic Pull Requests
  5. 2026Safer Builders, Risky Maintainers: A Comparative Study of Breaking Changes in Human vs Agentic PRs
  6. 2026Humans Integrate, Agents Fix: How Agent-Authored Pull Requests Are Referenced in Practice
  7. 2026AIDev: Studying AI Coding Agents on GitHub
  8. 2026On Autopilot? An Empirical Study of Human-AI Teaming and Review Practices in Open Source