Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Gemini 2.5 Flash
Gemini 2.5 Flash
119 tokens/sec
GPT-4o
56 tokens/sec
Gemini 2.5 Pro Pro
43 tokens/sec
o3 Pro
6 tokens/sec
GPT-4.1 Pro
47 tokens/sec
DeepSeek R1 via Azure Pro
28 tokens/sec
2000 character limit reached

Grounded Copilot: How Programmers Interact with Code-Generating Models (2206.15000v3)

Published 30 Jun 2022 in cs.HC and cs.PL

Abstract: Powered by recent advances in code-generating models, AI assistants like Github Copilot promise to change the face of programming forever. But what is this new face of programming? We present the first grounded theory analysis of how programmers interact with Copilot, based on observing 20 participants--with a range of prior experience using the assistant--as they solve diverse programming tasks across four languages. Our main finding is that interactions with programming assistants are bimodal: in acceleration mode, the programmer knows what to do next and uses Copilot to get there faster; in exploration mode, the programmer is unsure how to proceed and uses Copilot to explore their options. Based on our theory, we provide recommendations for improving the usability of future AI programming assistants.

User Edit Pencil Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com
Authors (3)
  1. Shraddha Barke (6 papers)
  2. Michael B. James (2 papers)
  3. Nadia Polikarpova (24 papers)
Citations (254)

Summary

Copilot: Insights into Programmers' Interactions with AI Code Generators

The paper "Grounded Copilot: How Programmers Interact with Code-Generating Models" conducted by Barke, James, and Polikarpova provides an in-depth exploration of the interactions programmers have with AI-powered code-generating tools, specifically GitHub Copilot. The paper stands out as the first grounded theory analysis of such interactions, offering valuable insights into how these tools are being integrated into the programming workflows.

Methodology and Participants

The authors utilized a grounded theory approach, which emphasizes developing theoretical insights from systematically collected data. They engaged 20 participants of diverse backgrounds in academia and industry, providing a broad spectrum of prior experiences with Copilot. This mixed group helped ensure that the resultant theory accounted for various use scenarios and expertise levels. Over a series of programming tasks spanning different languages (Python, Rust, Haskell, and Java), participants interacted with Copilot, revealing their workflows and integration strategies with the AI assistant.

Dual Modes of Interaction

The core finding of this research is that programmers' interactions with Copilot are bimodal, categorized into "acceleration" and "exploration." This classification parallels the dual-process theories in cognitive psychology, where acceleration is akin to fast, intuitive actions, and exploration is synonymous with slow, deliberate reasoning.

  • Acceleration Mode: In this mode, programmers know the exact steps needed to complete a task and leverage Copilot to speed up the process. The interaction is characterized by the use of Copilot as a sophisticated autocomplete tool, with programmers focusing on small logical units. Long, complex suggestions often disrupt the flow, highlighting the need for Copilot to tailor its outputs more precisely to avoid breaking user concentration.
  • Exploration Mode: This arises when programmers are tackling less familiar tasks or exploring new problem-solving paths. In such cases, users rely on Copilot to provide diverse suggestions and possible solutions. This mode involves deliberate use of Copilot's multi-suggestion pane and frequent validations through testing and examinations.

User Strategies and Recommendations

The paper found that when programmers are unclear on task decomposition, they lean towards exploration mode, employing extensive use of comment prompts to guide Copilot's suggestions. Here, trust in the AI model and expectation management play significant roles, with users needing to temper optimism regarding Copilot's capabilities.

For accelerating productivity and utility, the authors recommend future programming assistants be sensitive to the programmer's interaction mode. Suggestions should be context-aware, maintaining brevity during acceleration and catering to exploration with diverse, well-contrasted options. Additionally, aids like confidence indicators and improved validation tools may significantly enhance user experience.

Implications and Future Directions

The implications of this paper are profound, suggesting that as AI tools like Copilot evolve, they could substantially transform programming methodologies. The delineation of interaction modes points to the need for adaptive AI models that dynamically adjust their behavior based on user context and needs. The paper also highlights the potential for AI to alleviate mundane programming tasks, allowing developers to focus on higher-order problem solving.

This analysis also sets the stage for further research into multi-language interactions, broader integrations of AI into diverse programming environments, and the long-term effects of AI assistance on software development processes. Understanding these dynamics is crucial for optimizing the design of future AI-driven tools that enhance rather than hinder developer productivity.

Youtube Logo Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com
Reddit Logo Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com