Saved in:
| Main Authors: | Pham, Dung, Ghaleb, Taher A. |
|---|---|
| Format: | Preprint |
| Published: |
2026
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://arxiv.org/abs/2601.17627 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
Similar Items
Fingerprinting AI Coding Agents on GitHub
by: Ghaleb, Taher A.
Published: (2026)
by: Ghaleb, Taher A.
Published: (2026)
How AI Coding Agents Communicate: A Study of Pull Request Description Characteristics and Human Review Responses
by: Watanabe, Kan, et al.
Published: (2026)
by: Watanabe, Kan, et al.
Published: (2026)
On the Use of Agentic Coding: An Empirical Study of Pull Requests on GitHub
by: Watanabe, Miku, et al.
Published: (2025)
by: Watanabe, Miku, et al.
Published: (2025)
The Value of Effective Pull Request Description
by: Pirouzkhah, Shirin, et al.
Published: (2026)
by: Pirouzkhah, Shirin, et al.
Published: (2026)
How Do Developers Use Code Suggestions in Pull Request Reviews?
by: Bouraffa, Abir, et al.
Published: (2025)
by: Bouraffa, Abir, et al.
Published: (2025)
Let's Make Every Pull Request Meaningful: An Empirical Analysis of Developer and Agentic Pull Requests
by: Yoshioka, Haruhiko, et al.
Published: (2026)
by: Yoshioka, Haruhiko, et al.
Published: (2026)
Do Autonomous Agents Contribute Test Code? A Study of Tests in Agentic Pull Requests
by: Haque, Sabrina, et al.
Published: (2026)
by: Haque, Sabrina, et al.
Published: (2026)
When AI Agents Touch CI/CD Configurations: Frequency and Success
by: Ghaleb, Taher A.
Published: (2026)
by: Ghaleb, Taher A.
Published: (2026)
Why Are Agentic Pull Requests Merged or Rejected? An Empirical Study
by: Peralta, Sien Reeve O., et al.
Published: (2026)
by: Peralta, Sien Reeve O., et al.
Published: (2026)
Can LLMs Write CI? A Study on Automatic Generation of GitHub Actions Configurations
by: Ghaleb, Taher A., et al.
Published: (2025)
by: Ghaleb, Taher A., et al.
Published: (2025)
How Compliant Are GitHub Actions Workflows? A Checklist-Based Study with LLM-Assisted Auditing
by: Abrokwah, Edward, et al.
Published: (2026)
by: Abrokwah, Edward, et al.
Published: (2026)
An Empirical Study of Complexity, Heterogeneity, and Compliance of GitHub Actions Workflows
by: Abrokwah, Edward, et al.
Published: (2025)
by: Abrokwah, Edward, et al.
Published: (2025)
Human-Agent versus Human Pull Requests: A Testing-Focused Characterization and Comparison
by: Milanese, Roberto, et al.
Published: (2026)
by: Milanese, Roberto, et al.
Published: (2026)
From First Use to Final Commit: Studying the Evolution of Multi-CI Service Adoption
by: Chopra, Nitika, et al.
Published: (2025)
by: Chopra, Nitika, et al.
Published: (2025)
Mapping GitHub Sponsorships: A Longitudinal Observatory for Open-Source Sustainability
by: Hiltz, Rylan, et al.
Published: (2026)
by: Hiltz, Rylan, et al.
Published: (2026)
Comparing AI Coding Agents: A Task-Stratified Analysis of Pull Request Acceptance
by: Pinna, Giovanni, et al.
Published: (2026)
by: Pinna, Giovanni, et al.
Published: (2026)
Empirical Analysis of Pull Requests for Google Summer of Code
by: Popoola, Saheed
Published: (2024)
by: Popoola, Saheed
Published: (2024)
CI/CD Configuration Practices in Open-Source Android Apps: An Empirical Study
by: Ghaleb, Taher A., et al.
Published: (2024)
by: Ghaleb, Taher A., et al.
Published: (2024)
Role of CI Adoption in Mobile App Success: An Empirical Study of Open-Source Android Projects
by: Zhou, Xiaoxin, et al.
Published: (2026)
by: Zhou, Xiaoxin, et al.
Published: (2026)
A Vision for Context-Aware CI Adoption Decisions
by: Alaini, Osamah H., et al.
Published: (2026)
by: Alaini, Osamah H., et al.
Published: (2026)
A Comprehensive Multi-Vocal Empirical Study of ML Cloud Service Misuses
by: Amor, Hadil Ben, et al.
Published: (2025)
by: Amor, Hadil Ben, et al.
Published: (2025)
Generative AI for Pull Request Descriptions: Adoption, Impact, and Developer Interventions
by: Xiao, Tao, et al.
Published: (2024)
by: Xiao, Tao, et al.
Published: (2024)
Evaluating the Impact of Data Cleaning on the Quality of Generated Pull Request Descriptions
by: Tire, Kutay, et al.
Published: (2025)
by: Tire, Kutay, et al.
Published: (2025)
Where Do AI Coding Agents Fail? An Empirical Study of Failed Agentic Pull Requests in GitHub
by: Ehsani, Ramtin, et al.
Published: (2026)
by: Ehsani, Ramtin, et al.
Published: (2026)
CIgrate: Automating CI Service Migration with Large Language Models
by: Hossain, Md Nazmul, et al.
Published: (2025)
by: Hossain, Md Nazmul, et al.
Published: (2025)
How Do Agentic AI Systems Deal With Software Energy Concerns? A Pull Request-Based Study
by: Mitul, Tanjum Motin, et al.
Published: (2025)
by: Mitul, Tanjum Motin, et al.
Published: (2025)
Security in the Age of AI Teammates: An Empirical Study of Agentic Pull Requests on GitHub
by: Siddiq, Mohammed Latif, et al.
Published: (2026)
by: Siddiq, Mohammed Latif, et al.
Published: (2026)
A Study of Library Usage in Agent-Authored Pull Requests
by: Twist, Lukas, et al.
Published: (2025)
by: Twist, Lukas, et al.
Published: (2025)
On the Footprints of Reviewer Bots Feedback on Agentic Pull Requests in OSS GitHub Repositories
by: Fatima, Syeda Kaneez, et al.
Published: (2026)
by: Fatima, Syeda Kaneez, et al.
Published: (2026)
Security Debt in Practice: Nuanced Insights from Practitioners
by: Boufaied, Chaima, et al.
Published: (2025)
by: Boufaied, Chaima, et al.
Published: (2025)
From Industry Claims to Empirical Reality: An Empirical Study of Code Review Agents in Pull Requests
by: Chowdhury, Kowshik, et al.
Published: (2026)
by: Chowdhury, Kowshik, et al.
Published: (2026)
The Promise and Reality of Continuous Integration Caching: An Empirical Study of Travis CI Builds
by: Ghaleb, Taher A., et al.
Published: (2026)
by: Ghaleb, Taher A., et al.
Published: (2026)
Self-Admitted Technical Debt in LLM Software: An Empirical Comparison with ML and Non-ML Software
by: Selvanayagam, Niruthiha, et al.
Published: (2026)
by: Selvanayagam, Niruthiha, et al.
Published: (2026)
Android Instrumentation Testing in Continuous Integration: Practices, Patterns, and Performance
by: Parsazadeh, Hamid, et al.
Published: (2026)
by: Parsazadeh, Hamid, et al.
Published: (2026)
LTM: Scalable and Black-box Similarity-based Test Suite Minimization based on Language Models
by: Pan, Rongqi, et al.
Published: (2023)
by: Pan, Rongqi, et al.
Published: (2023)
Quality Gatekeepers: Investigating the Effects ofCode Review Bots on Pull Request Activities
by: Wessel, Mairieli, et al.
Published: (2021)
by: Wessel, Mairieli, et al.
Published: (2021)
Change And Cover: Last-Mile, Pull Request-Based Regression Test Augmentation
by: Zhou, Zitong, et al.
Published: (2026)
by: Zhou, Zitong, et al.
Published: (2026)
Analyzing Message-Code Inconsistency in AI Coding Agent-Authored Pull Requests
by: Gong, Jingzhi, et al.
Published: (2026)
by: Gong, Jingzhi, et al.
Published: (2026)
GitHub Actions: The Impact on the Pull Request Process
by: Wessel, Mairieli, et al.
Published: (2022)
by: Wessel, Mairieli, et al.
Published: (2022)
How Do Agentic AI Systems Address Performance Optimizations? A BERTopic-Based Analysis of Pull Requests
by: Opu, Md Nahidul Islam, et al.
Published: (2025)
by: Opu, Md Nahidul Islam, et al.
Published: (2025)
Similar Items
-
Fingerprinting AI Coding Agents on GitHub
by: Ghaleb, Taher A.
Published: (2026) -
How AI Coding Agents Communicate: A Study of Pull Request Description Characteristics and Human Review Responses
by: Watanabe, Kan, et al.
Published: (2026) -
On the Use of Agentic Coding: An Empirical Study of Pull Requests on GitHub
by: Watanabe, Miku, et al.
Published: (2025) -
The Value of Effective Pull Request Description
by: Pirouzkhah, Shirin, et al.
Published: (2026) -
How Do Developers Use Code Suggestions in Pull Request Reviews?
by: Bouraffa, Abir, et al.
Published: (2025)