These Aren't the Reviews You're Looking For How Humans Review AI-Generated Pull Requests

Fuente: arXiv
Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Hauptverfasser: Duma, Kacper, Wróblewski, Patryk, Bobińska, Jagoda, Winiarska, Julia, Przymus, Piotr
Format: Preprint
Veröffentlicht: 2026
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
_version_ 1866909011712933888
author Duma, Kacper
Wróblewski, Patryk
Bobińska, Jagoda
Winiarska, Julia
Przymus, Piotr
author_facet Duma, Kacper
Wróblewski, Patryk
Bobińska, Jagoda
Winiarska, Julia
Przymus, Piotr
contents We analyze code review interactions for AI-generated pull requests (PRs) on GitHub using the AIDev dataset and compare them to human-authored PRs within the same repositories. We find that most AI-generated PRs receive no review and, when reviewed, are largely dominated by AI agents rather than humans. Human-authored PRs are more likely to receive human-only review and to attract direct human feedback. In contrast, reviews of AI-generated PRs more often take the form of automation-mediated interaction, with human involvement frequently expressed through agent steering rather than standalone evaluation. These results indicate systematic differences in how review activity is structured in agentic workflows and raise challenges for interpreting review metrics as indicators of human oversight in large-scale mining studies.
format Preprint
id arxiv_https___arxiv_org_abs_2605_02273
institution arXiv
publishDate 2026
record_format arxiv
spellingShingle These Aren't the Reviews You're Looking For How Humans Review AI-Generated Pull Requests
Duma, Kacper
Wróblewski, Patryk
Bobińska, Jagoda
Winiarska, Julia
Przymus, Piotr
Software Engineering
We analyze code review interactions for AI-generated pull requests (PRs) on GitHub using the AIDev dataset and compare them to human-authored PRs within the same repositories. We find that most AI-generated PRs receive no review and, when reviewed, are largely dominated by AI agents rather than humans. Human-authored PRs are more likely to receive human-only review and to attract direct human feedback. In contrast, reviews of AI-generated PRs more often take the form of automation-mediated interaction, with human involvement frequently expressed through agent steering rather than standalone evaluation. These results indicate systematic differences in how review activity is structured in agentic workflows and raise challenges for interpreting review metrics as indicators of human oversight in large-scale mining studies.
title These Aren't the Reviews You're Looking For How Humans Review AI-Generated Pull Requests
topic Software Engineering
url https://arxiv.org/abs/2605.02273