An Empirical Study on Developers Shared Conversations with ChatGPT in GitHub Pull Requests and Issues

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2403.10468v1
• Date: Fri, 15 Mar 2024 16:58:37 GMT
• Title: An Empirical Study on Developers Shared Conversations with ChatGPT in GitHub Pull Requests and Issues
• Authors: Huizi Hao, Kazi Amit Hasan, Hong Qin, Marcos Macedo, Yuan Tian, Steven H. H. Ding, Ahmed E. Hassan,
• Abstract summary: ChatGPT has significantly impacted software development practices. Despite its widespread adoption, the impact of ChatGPT as an assistant in collaborative coding remains largely unexplored. We analyze a dataset of 210 and 370 developers shared conversations with ChatGPT in GitHub pull requests (PRs) and issues.
• Score: 20.121332699827633
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/
• Abstract: ChatGPT has significantly impacted software development practices, providing substantial assistance to developers in a variety of tasks, including coding, testing, and debugging. Despite its widespread adoption, the impact of ChatGPT as an assistant in collaborative coding remains largely unexplored. In this paper, we analyze a dataset of 210 and 370 developers shared conversations with ChatGPT in GitHub pull requests (PRs) and issues. We manually examined the content of the conversations and characterized the dynamics of the sharing behavior, i.e., understanding the rationale behind the sharing, identifying the locations where the conversations were shared, and determining the roles of the developers who shared them. Our main observations are: (1) Developers seek ChatGPT assistance across 16 types of software engineering inquiries. In both conversations shared in PRs and issues, the most frequently encountered inquiry categories include code generation, conceptual questions, how-to guides, issue resolution, and code review. (2) Developers frequently engage with ChatGPT via multi-turn conversations where each prompt can fulfill various roles, such as unveiling initial or new tasks, iterative follow-up, and prompt refinement. Multi-turn conversations account for 33.2% of the conversations shared in PRs and 36.9% in issues. (3) In collaborative coding, developers leverage shared conversations with ChatGPT to facilitate their role-specific contributions, whether as authors of PRs or issues, code reviewers, or collaborators on issues. Our work serves as the first step towards understanding the dynamics between developers and ChatGPT in collaborative software development and opens up new directions for future research on the topic.

Related papers

• Rocks Coding, Not Development--A Human-Centric, Experimental Evaluation of LLM-Supported SE Tasks [9.455579863269714]
  We examined whether and to what degree working with ChatGPT was helpful in the coding task and typical software development task. We found that while ChatGPT performed well in solving simple coding problems, its performance in supporting typical software development tasks was not that good. Our study thus provides first-hand insights into using ChatGPT to fulfill software engineering tasks with real-world developers.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-08T13:07:31Z)
• Investigating the Utility of ChatGPT in the Issue Tracking System: An Exploratory Study [5.176434782905268]
  This study examines the interaction between ChatGPT and developers to analyze their prevalent activities and provide a resolution. Our investigation reveals that developers mainly use ChatGPT for brainstorming solutions but often opt to write their code instead of using ChatGPT-generated code.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-06T06:03:05Z)
• Exploring ChatGPT's Capabilities on Vulnerability Management [56.4403395100589]
  We explore ChatGPT's capabilities on 6 tasks involving the complete vulnerability management process with a large-scale dataset containing 70,346 samples. One notable example is ChatGPT's proficiency in tasks like generating titles for software bug reports. Our findings reveal the difficulties encountered by ChatGPT and shed light on promising future directions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-11T11:01:13Z)
• An empirical study of ChatGPT-3.5 on question answering and code maintenance [14.028497274245227]
  A rising concern is whether ChatGPT will replace programmers and kill jobs. We conducted an empirical study to systematically compare ChatGPT against programmers in question-answering and software-maintaining.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-03T14:48:32Z)
• DevGPT: Studying Developer-ChatGPT Conversations [12.69439932665687]
  This paper introduces DevGPT, a dataset curated to explore how software developers interact with ChatGPT. The dataset encompasses 29,778 prompts and responses from ChatGPT, including 19,106 code snippets.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-08-31T06:55:40Z)
• Uncovering the Potential of ChatGPT for Discourse Analysis in Dialogue: An Empirical Study [51.079100495163736]
  This paper systematically inspects ChatGPT's performance in two discourse analysis tasks: topic segmentation and discourse parsing. ChatGPT demonstrates proficiency in identifying topic structures in general-domain conversations yet struggles considerably in specific-domain conversations. Our deeper investigation indicates that ChatGPT can give more reasonable topic structures than human annotations but only linearly parses the hierarchical rhetorical structures.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-15T07:14:41Z)
• Is ChatGPT the Ultimate Programming Assistant -- How far is it? [11.943927095071105]
  ChatGPT has received great attention: it can be used as a bot for discussing source code. We present an empirical study of ChatGPT's potential as a fully automated programming assistant.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-04-24T09:20:13Z)
• ChatGPT is a Knowledgeable but Inexperienced Solver: An Investigation of Commonsense Problem in Large Language Models [49.52083248451775]
  Large language models (LLMs) have made significant progress in NLP. We specifically focus on ChatGPT, a widely used and easily accessible LLM. We conduct a series of experiments on 11 datasets to evaluate ChatGPT's commonsense abilities.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-03-29T03:05:43Z)
• A Multitask, Multilingual, Multimodal Evaluation of ChatGPT on Reasoning, Hallucination, and Interactivity [79.12003701981092]
  We carry out an extensive technical evaluation of ChatGPT using 23 data sets covering 8 different common NLP application tasks. We evaluate the multitask, multilingual and multi-modal aspects of ChatGPT based on these data sets and a newly designed multimodal dataset. ChatGPT is 63.41% accurate on average in 10 different reasoning categories under logical reasoning, non-textual reasoning, and commonsense reasoning.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-02-08T12:35:34Z)
• QAConv: Question Answering on Informative Conversations [85.2923607672282]
  We focus on informative conversations including business emails, panel discussions, and work channels. In total, we collect 34,204 QA pairs, including span-based, free-form, and unanswerable questions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-05-14T15:53:05Z)
• Conversations with Search Engines: SERP-based Conversational Response Generation [77.1381159789032]
  We create a suitable dataset, the Search as a Conversation (SaaC) dataset, for the development of pipelines for conversations with search engines. We also develop a state-of-the-art pipeline for conversations with search engines, the Conversations with Search Engines (CaSE) using this dataset. CaSE enhances the state-of-the-art by introducing a supporting token identification module and aprior-aware pointer generator.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-04-29T13:07:53Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.