Shyam Agarwal

Aditya Mittal, Ryan Shar, Zichu Wu et al. · cmu

As LLMs are increasingly used as judges in code applications, they should be evaluated in realistic interactive settings that capture partial context and ambiguous intent. We present TRACE (Tool for Rubric Analysis in Code Evaluation), a framework that evaluates LLM judges' ability to predict human preferences and automatically extracts rubric items to reveal systematic biases in how humans and models weigh each item. Across three modalities -- chat-based programming, IDE autocompletion, and instructed code editing -- we use TRACE to measure how well LLM judges align with developer preferences. Among 13 different models, the best judges underperform human annotators by 12-23%. TRACE identifies 35 significant sources of misalignment between humans and judges across interaction modalities, the majority of which correspond to existing software engineering code quality criteria. For example, in chat-based coding, judges are biased towards longer code explanations while humans prefer shorter ones. We find significant misalignment on the majority of existing code quality dimensions, showing alignment gaps between LLM judges and human preference in realistic coding applications.

Hao He, Courtney Miller, Shyam Agarwal et al.

Large language models (LLMs) have demonstrated the promise to revolutionize the field of software engineering. Among other things, LLM agents are rapidly gaining momentum in their application to software development, with practitioners claiming a multifold productivity increase after adoption. Yet, empirical evidence is lacking around these claims. In this paper, we estimate the causal effect of adopting a widely popular LLM agent assistant, namely Cursor, on development velocity and software quality. The estimation is enabled by a state-of-the-art difference-in-differences design comparing Cursor-adopting GitHub projects with a matched control group of similar GitHub projects that do not use Cursor. We find that the adoption of Cursor leads to a significant, large, but transient increase in project-level development velocity, along with a significant and persistent increase in static analysis warnings and code complexity. Further panel generalized method of moments estimation reveals that the increase in static analysis warnings and code complexity acts as a major factor causing long-term velocity slowdown. Our study carries implications for software engineering practitioners, LLM agent assistant designers, and researchers.

Eason Chen, Xinyi Tang, Yvonne Zhao et al.

We conducted a between-subjects experiment (N=92) comparing three conditions in a calculus learning environment: no self-explanation (control), menu-based self-explanation, and open-ended self-explanation with LLM-generated feedback. All conditions showed positive learning gains within a fixed 60-minute practice session, with no significant between-condition differences in post-test performance. On transfer questions, the open-ended condition produced significantly higher-quality explanations than control on "Not Enough Information" (NEI) problems ($β$=+11.9 percentage points, $p$=.030), though the corresponding NEI multiple-choice accuracy advantage was not significant ($p$=.183). Moreover, across all post-test open-ended explanations, the open-ended condition showed a marginally significant advantage ($β$=+7.3%, $p$=.057). These findings suggest that LLM-supported open-ended self-explanation can improve explanation quality on NEI transfer problems, with weaker evidence across broader transfer explanation measures. Notably, these effects emerged even though learners in the open-ended condition completed substantially fewer practice problems within the same practice time.

Shyam Agarwal, Mahasweta Chakraborti

The past decade has seen a massive rise in the popularity of AI systems, mainly owing to the developments in Gen AI, which has revolutionized numerous industries and applications. However, this progress comes at a considerable cost to the environment as training and deploying these models consume significant computational resources and energy and are responsible for large carbon footprints in the atmosphere. In this paper, we study the amount of carbon dioxide released by models across different domains over varying time periods. By examining parameters such as model size, repository activity (e.g., commits and repository age), task type, and organizational affiliation, we identify key factors influencing the environmental impact of AI development. Our findings reveal that model size and versioning frequency are strongly correlated with higher emissions, while domain-specific trends show that NLP models tend to have lower carbon footprints compared to audio-based systems. Organizational context also plays a significant role, with university-driven projects exhibiting the highest emissions, followed by non-profits and companies, while community-driven projects show a reduction in emissions. These results highlight the critical need for green AI practices, including the adoption of energy-efficient architectures, optimizing development workflows, and leveraging renewable energy sources. We also discuss a few practices that can lead to a more sustainable future with AI, and we end this paper with some future research directions that could be motivated by our work. This work not only provides actionable insights to mitigate the environmental impact of AI but also poses new research questions for the community to explore. By emphasizing the interplay between sustainability and innovation, our study aims to guide future efforts toward building a more ecologically responsible AI ecosystem.