Vinaik Chhetri

Daniel Liu, Krishna Upadhyay, Vinaik Chhetri et al.

The rapid emergence of multi-agent AI systems (MAS), including LangChain, CrewAI, and AutoGen, has shaped how large language model (LLM) applications are developed and orchestrated. However, little is known about how these systems evolve and are maintained in practice. This paper presents the first large-scale empirical study of open-source MAS, analyzing over 42K unique commits and over 4.7K resolved issues across eight leading systems. Our analysis identifies three distinct development profiles: sustained, steady, and burst-driven. These profiles reflect substantial variation in ecosystem maturity. Perfective commits constitute 40.8% of all changes, suggesting that feature enhancement is prioritized over corrective maintenance (27.4%) and adaptive updates (24.3%). Data about issues shows that the most frequent concerns involve bugs (22%), infrastructure (14%), and agent coordination challenges (10%). Issue reporting also increased sharply across all frameworks starting in 2023. Median resolution times range from under one day to about two weeks, with distributions skewed toward fast responses but a minority of issues requiring extended attention. These results highlight both the momentum and the fragility of the current ecosystem, emphasizing the need for improved testing infrastructure, documentation quality, and maintenance practices to ensure long-term reliability and sustainability.

Vinaik Chhetri, A. B Siddique, Umar Farooq

Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used in software development. However, while LLMs remain static after pretraining, programming languages and APIs continue to evolve, leading to the generation of deprecated or incompatible code that undermines reliability. Retraining LLMs from scratch to reflect such changes is computationally expensive, making model editing a promising lightweight alternative that updates only a small subset of parameters. Despite its potential, it remains unclear whether model editing yields genuine syntactic and semantic adaptations or merely superficial fixes. In this work, we present a systematic study of five state-of-the-art model editing methods: Constrained Fine-Tuning (FT), GRACE, MEMIT, PMET, and ROME. We apply these methods to three leading open-source code LLMs, CodeLlama, CodeQwen1.5, and DeepSeek-Coder, under controlled API deprecation scenarios. Our evaluation covers both instant and sequential editing settings, using three disjoint evaluation sets designed to assess reliability, generalization, and specificity. We measure model correctness at three levels: successful compilation, partial test case pass, and full test pass. Our findings show that instant edits consistently degrade model performance, with syntactic validity dropping by up to 86 percentage points and functional correctness declining by 45 points even in the best-performing setting. Sequential edits further amplify this degradation, and in some cases, model performance collapses entirely. Across all models, most passing generations relied on workarounds rather than correctly adopting the intended changes, while faulty adoptions that result in test failures or compilation errors were significantly more frequent. Correct adoptions, where the model correctly integrates the intended change, occurred in only about 6% of cases.

Vinaik Chhetri, Yousaf Reza, Moghis Fereidouni et al.

Modern recommendation systems typically follow two complementary paradigms: collaborative filtering, which models long-term user preferences from historical interactions, and conversational recommendation systems (CRS), which interact with users in natural language to uncover immediate needs. Each captures a different dimension of user intent. While CRS models lack collaborative signals, leading to generic or poorly personalized suggestions, traditional recommenders lack mechanisms to interactively elicit immediate needs. Unifying these paradigms promises richer personalization but remains challenging due to the lack of large-scale conversational datasets grounded in real user behavior. We present ConvRecStudio, a framework that uses large language models (LLMs) to simulate realistic, multi-turn dialogs grounded in timestamped user-item interactions and reviews. ConvRecStudio follows a three-stage pipeline: (1) Temporal Profiling, which constructs user profiles and community-level item sentiment trajectories over fine-grained aspects; (2) Semantic Dialog Planning, which generates a structured plan using a DAG of flexible super-nodes; and (3) Multi-Turn Simulation, which instantiates the plan using paired LLM agents for the user and system, constrained by executional and behavioral fidelity checks. We apply ConvRecStudio to three domains -- MobileRec, Yelp, and Amazon Electronics -- producing over 12K multi-turn dialogs per dataset. Human and automatic evaluations confirm the naturalness, coherence, and behavioral grounding of the generated conversations. To demonstrate utility, we build a cross-attention transformer model that jointly encodes user history and dialog context, achieving gains in Hit@K and NDCG@K over baselines using either signal alone or naive fusion. Notably, our model achieves a 10.9% improvement in Hit@1 on Yelp over the strongest baseline.

Vinaik Chhetri, Krishna Upadhyay, A. B. Siddique et al.

Artificial Intelligence (AI)-powered features have rapidly proliferated across mobile apps in various domains, including productivity, education, entertainment, and creativity. However, how users perceive, evaluate, and critique these AI features remains largely unexplored, primarily due to the overwhelming volume of user feedback. In this work, we present the first comprehensive, large-scale study of user feedback on AI-powered mobile apps, leveraging a curated dataset of 292 AI-driven apps across 14 categories with 894K AI-specific reviews from Google Play. We develop and validate a multi-stage analysis pipeline that begins with a human-labeled benchmark and systematically evaluates large language models (LLMs) and prompting strategies. Each stage, including review classification, aspect-sentiment extraction, and clustering, is validated for accuracy and consistency. Our pipeline enables scalable, high-precision analysis of user feedback, extracting over one million aspect-sentiment pairs clustered into 18 positive and 15 negative user topics. Our analysis reveals that users consistently focus on a narrow set of themes: positive comments emphasize productivity, reliability, and personalized assistance, while negative feedback highlights technical failures (e.g., scanning and recognition), pricing concerns, and limitations in language support. Our pipeline surfaces both satisfaction with one feature and frustration with another within the same review. These fine-grained, co-occurring sentiments are often missed by traditional approaches that treat positive and negative feedback in isolation or rely on coarse-grained analysis. To this end, our approach provides a more faithful reflection of the real-world user experiences with AI-powered apps. Category-aware analysis further uncovers both universal drivers of satisfaction and domain-specific frustrations.