Revisiting the Performance of Generative Artificial Intelligence on Introductory Object-Oriented Programming Assessments: Insights from 2026

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2608.16318v1
• Date: Mon, 17 Aug 2026 09:24:28 GMT
• Title: Revisiting the Performance of Generative Artificial Intelligence on Introductory Object-Oriented Programming Assessments: Insights from 2026
• Abstract summary: This study evaluates five widely used GenAI systems, ChatGPT-5.2, DeepSeek-V3, Gemini 2.5 Flash, Claude Sonnet 4.5, and M365 Copilot, using programming tests and examination tasks from an introductory university OOP course.<n>All evaluated GenAI systems achieved higher scores than the average student cohort and frequently obtained full marks on longer programming tasks.
• Score: 0.0
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Recent advances in Generative Artificial Intelligence (GenAI) have substantially improved the ability of large language models (LLMs) to generate and explain source code. However, their performance on authentic object-oriented programming (OOP) assessments remains insufficiently understood. This study evaluates five widely used GenAI systems, ChatGPT-5.2, DeepSeek-V3, Gemini 2.5 Flash, Claude Sonnet 4.5, and M365 Copilot, using programming tests and examination tasks from an introductory university OOP course. The generated solutions were assessed using the same grading criteria applied to students and compared with historical student results from the same course, as well as findings from the previous year. Common errors were also analyzed to identify recurring limitations across models. All evaluated GenAI systems achieved higher scores than the average student cohort and frequently obtained full marks on longer programming tasks. Nevertheless, they occasionally produced non-compiling code and continued to struggle with advanced OOP concepts, particularly interfaces, abstract classes, and certain inheritance-related tasks. Performance was also limited on graphics-related questions involving image interpretation. Compared with the previous year, the evaluated systems demonstrated noticeable improvements across most assessments while exhibiting several recurring error patterns. The findings provide an updated evaluation of the capabilities and limitations of contemporary GenAI systems on authentic introductory OOP assessments. They also offer evidence that can inform the design of programming assessments, the responsible integration of GenAI tools into software engineering education, and future studies evaluating the evolution of AI-assisted programming.

Related papers

• Ensuring Computer Science Learning in the AI Era: Open Generative AI Policies and Assignment-Driven Written Quizzes [0.0]
  This paper presents an assessment model that permits the use of generative AI for take-home programming assignments.<n>To promote authentic learning, in-class, closed-book assessments are weighted more heavily than the assignments themselves.<n> Statistical analyses revealed no meaningful linear correlation between GenAI usage levels and assessment outcomes.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-01-16T17:02:44Z)
• Evaluating undergraduate mathematics examinations in the era of generative AI: a curriculum-level case study [0.0]
  We generate, transcribe, and blind-mark GenAI submissions to eight undergraduate mathematics examinations at a Russell Group university.<n>We find that GenAI attainment is at the level of a first-class degree, though current performance can vary between modules.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-09-15T10:34:31Z)
• The next question after Turing's question: Introducing the Grow-AI test [51.56484100374058]
  This study aims to extend the framework for assessing artificial intelligence, called GROW-AI.<n>GROW-AI is designed to answer the question "Can machines grow up?" -- a natural successor to the Turing Test.<n>The originality of the work lies in the conceptual transposition of the process of "growing" from the human world to that of artificial intelligence.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-08-22T10:19:42Z)
• Rethinking Machine Unlearning in Image Generation Models [59.697750585491264]
  CatIGMU is a novel hierarchical task categorization framework.<n>EvalIGMU is a comprehensive evaluation framework.<n>We construct DataIGM, a high-quality unlearning dataset.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-06-03T11:25:14Z)
• Challenging the Boundaries of Reasoning: An Olympiad-Level Math Benchmark for Large Language Models [86.45058529521258]
  OlymMATH is a novel Olympiad-level mathematical benchmark designed to rigorously test the complex reasoning capabilities of LLMs.<n>OlymMATH features 200 meticulously curated problems, each manually verified and available in parallel English and Chinese versions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-03-27T11:20:17Z)
• Generative AI for Software Architecture. Applications, Challenges, and Future Directions [6.883775050854466]
  We aim to systematically synthesize the use, rationale, contexts, usability, and future challenges of GenAI in software architecture.<n>Our review identified significant adoption of GenAI for architectural decision support and architectural reconstruction.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-03-17T15:49:30Z)
• Dimensions of Generative AI Evaluation Design [51.541816010127256]
  We propose a set of general dimensions that capture critical choices involved in GenAI evaluation design. These dimensions include the evaluation setting, the task type, the input source, the interaction style, the duration, the metric type, and the scoring method.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-11-19T18:25:30Z)
• GenLens: A Systematic Evaluation of Visual GenAI Model Outputs [33.93591473459988]
  GenLens is a visual analytic interface designed for the systematic evaluation of GenAI model outputs. A user study with model developers reveals that GenLens effectively enhances their workflow, evidenced by high satisfaction rates.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-06T04:41:06Z)
• From GPT-3 to GPT-4: On the Evolving Efficacy of LLMs to Answer Multiple-choice Questions for Programming Classes in Higher Education [2.6626950367610402]
  We explore the evolving efficacy of three generative pre-trained transformer (GPT) models in generating answers for multiple-choice questions (MCQ) We focus on the differences in capabilities of the models prior to the release of ChatGPT (Nov '22), at the time of the release, and today (i.e., Aug '23)
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-16T02:46:15Z)
• ARB: Advanced Reasoning Benchmark for Large Language Models [94.37521840642141]
  We introduce ARB, a novel benchmark composed of advanced reasoning problems in multiple fields. As a subset of ARB, we introduce a challenging set of math and physics problems which require advanced symbolic reasoning and domain knowledge. We evaluate recent models such as GPT-4 and Claude on ARB and demonstrate that current models score well below 50% on more demanding tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-07-25T17:55:19Z)
• Evaluation Toolkit For Robustness Testing Of Automatic Essay Scoring Systems [64.4896118325552]
  We evaluate the current state-of-the-art AES models using a model adversarial evaluation scheme and associated metrics. We find that AES models are highly overstable. Even heavy modifications(as much as 25%) with content unrelated to the topic of the questions do not decrease the score produced by the models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-07-14T03:49:43Z)

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.