Copertina

Human-Agent versus Human Pull Requests: A Testing-Focused Characterization and Comparison

Fuente: arXiv

Salvato in:

Dettagli Bibliografici
Autori principali:	Milanese, Roberto, Salzano, Francesco, Spina, Angelica, Vitale, Antonio, Pareschi, Remo, Fasano, Fausto, Fazzini, Mattia
Natura:	Preprint
Pubblicazione:	2026
Soggetti:	Software Engineering
Accesso online:	Acceder al recurso
Tags:	Aggiungi Tag Nessun Tag, puoi essere il primo ad aggiungerne!!

Documenti analoghi

Beyond Code Similarity: Benchmarking the Plausibility, Efficiency, and Complexity of LLM-Generated Smart Contracts
di: Salzano, Francesco, et al.
Pubblicazione: (2025)

Fixing Smart Contract Vulnerabilities: A Comparative Analysis of Literature and Developer's Practices
di: Salzano, Francesco, et al.
Pubblicazione: (2024)

Identifying and Characterizing Semantic Clones of Solidity Functions
di: Sannini, Ermanno Francesco, et al.
Pubblicazione: (2026)

Humans Integrate, Agents Fix: How Agent-Authored Pull Requests Are Referenced in Practice
di: Khemissi, Islem, et al.
Pubblicazione: (2026)

An empirical analysis of vulnerability detection tools for solidity smart contracts
di: Salzano, Francesco, et al.
Pubblicazione: (2025)

Bridging the Gap: A Comparative Study of Academic and Developer Approaches to Smart Contract Vulnerabilities
di: Salzano, Francesco, et al.
Pubblicazione: (2025)

Code Change Characteristics and Description Alignment: A Comparative Study of Agentic versus Human Pull Requests
di: Pham, Dung, et al.
Pubblicazione: (2026)

Who Said CVE? How Vulnerability Identifiers Are Mentioned by Humans, Bots, and Agents in Pull Requests
di: Rooijendijk, Pien, et al.
Pubblicazione: (2026)

Do Autonomous Agents Contribute Test Code? A Study of Tests in Agentic Pull Requests
di: Haque, Sabrina, et al.
Pubblicazione: (2026)

The Impact of Documentation on Test Engagement in Pull Requests in OSS
di: Amore, Teal, et al.
Pubblicazione: (2026)

Let's Make Every Pull Request Meaningful: An Empirical Analysis of Developer and Agentic Pull Requests
di: Yoshioka, Haruhiko, et al.
Pubblicazione: (2026)

A Study of Library Usage in Agent-Authored Pull Requests
di: Twist, Lukas, et al.
Pubblicazione: (2025)

These Aren't the Reviews You're Looking For How Humans Review AI-Generated Pull Requests
di: Duma, Kacper, et al.
Pubblicazione: (2026)

Automatically Removing Unnecessary Stubbings from Test Suites
di: Li, Mengzhen, et al.
Pubblicazione: (2024)

The Value of Effective Pull Request Description
di: Pirouzkhah, Shirin, et al.
Pubblicazione: (2026)

How AI Coding Agents Communicate: A Study of Pull Request Description Characteristics and Human Review Responses
di: Watanabe, Kan, et al.
Pubblicazione: (2026)

Change And Cover: Last-Mile, Pull Request-Based Regression Test Augmentation
di: Zhou, Zitong, et al.
Pubblicazione: (2026)

Comparing AI Coding Agents: A Task-Stratified Analysis of Pull Request Acceptance
di: Pinna, Giovanni, et al.
Pubblicazione: (2026)

Empirical Analysis of Pull Requests for Google Summer of Code
di: Popoola, Saheed
Pubblicazione: (2024)

GitHub Actions: The Impact on the Pull Request Process
di: Wessel, Mairieli, et al.
Pubblicazione: (2022)

Insights into Security-Related AI-Generated Pull Requests
di: Rabbi, Md Fazle, et al.
Pubblicazione: (2026)

From Industry Claims to Empirical Reality: An Empirical Study of Code Review Agents in Pull Requests
di: Chowdhury, Kowshik, et al.
Pubblicazione: (2026)

Collaborator or Assistant? How AI Coding Agents Partition Work Across Pull Request Lifecycles
di: Jo, Young, et al.
Pubblicazione: (2026)

Why Are Agentic Pull Requests Merged or Rejected? An Empirical Study
di: Peralta, Sien Reeve O., et al.
Pubblicazione: (2026)

The Quiet Contributions: Insights into AI-Generated Silent Pull Requests
di: Hasan, S M Mahedy, et al.
Pubblicazione: (2026)

Analyzing Message-Code Inconsistency in AI Coding Agent-Authored Pull Requests
di: Gong, Jingzhi, et al.
Pubblicazione: (2026)

On the Use of Agentic Coding: An Empirical Study of Pull Requests on GitHub
di: Watanabe, Miku, et al.
Pubblicazione: (2025)

Generative AI for Pull Request Descriptions: Adoption, Impact, and Developer Interventions
di: Xiao, Tao, et al.
Pubblicazione: (2024)

How Do Developers Use Code Suggestions in Pull Request Reviews?
di: Bouraffa, Abir, et al.
Pubblicazione: (2025)

Evaluating the Impact of Data Cleaning on the Quality of Generated Pull Request Descriptions
di: Tire, Kutay, et al.
Pubblicazione: (2025)

ICST Tool Competition 2025 -- Self-Driving Car Testing Track
di: Birchler, Christian, et al.
Pubblicazione: (2025)

Beyond Bug Fixes: An Empirical Investigation of Post-Merge Code Quality Issues in Agent-Generated Pull Requests
di: Cynthia, Shamse Tasnim, et al.
Pubblicazione: (2026)

Improving Merge Pipeline Throughput in Continuous Integration via Pull Request Prioritization
di: Jungwirth, Maximilian, et al.
Pubblicazione: (2025)

Why Are AI Agent Involved Pull Requests (Fix-Related) Remain Unmerged? An Empirical Study
di: Alam, Khairul, et al.
Pubblicazione: (2026)

On the Footprints of Reviewer Bots Feedback on Agentic Pull Requests in OSS GitHub Repositories
di: Fatima, Syeda Kaneez, et al.
Pubblicazione: (2026)

What Developers Ask to ChatGPT in GitHub Pull Requests? an Exploratory Study
di: Silva, Julyanara R., et al.
Pubblicazione: (2025)

Quality Gatekeepers: Investigating the Effects ofCode Review Bots on Pull Request Activities
di: Wessel, Mairieli, et al.
Pubblicazione: (2021)

Who Writes the Docs in SE 3.0? Agent vs. Human Documentation Pull Requests
di: Yamasaki, Kazuma, et al.
Pubblicazione: (2026)

Sphinx: Benchmarking and Modeling for LLM-Driven Pull Request Review
di: Zhang, Daoan, et al.
Pubblicazione: (2026)

MELT: Mining Effective Lightweight Transformations from Pull Requests
di: Ramos, Daniel, et al.
Pubblicazione: (2023)