3.4SEJul 25, 2025Code
Fine-Tuning Multilingual Language Models for Code Review: An Empirical Study on Industrial C# ProjectsIgli Begolli, Meltem Aksoy, Daniel Neider
Code review is essential for maintaining software quality but often time-consuming and cognitively demanding, especially in industrial environments. Recent advancements in language models (LMs) have opened new avenues for automating core review tasks. This study presents the empirical evaluation of monolingual fine-tuning on the performance of open-source LMs across three key automated code review tasks: Code Change Quality Estimation, Review Comment Generation, and Code Refinement. We fine-tuned three distinct models, CodeReviewer, CodeLlama-7B, and DeepSeek-R1-Distill, on a C\# specific dataset combining public benchmarks with industrial repositories. Our study investigates how different configurations of programming languages and natural languages in the training data affect LM performance, particularly in comment generation. Additionally, we benchmark the fine-tuned models against an automated software analysis tool (ASAT) and human reviewers to evaluate their practical utility in real-world settings. Our results show that monolingual fine-tuning improves model accuracy and relevance compared to multilingual baselines. While LMs can effectively support code review workflows, especially for routine or repetitive tasks, human reviewers remain superior in handling semantically complex or context-sensitive changes. Our findings highlight the importance of language alignment and task-specific adaptation in optimizing LMs for automated code review.
4.3CYMay 20, 2025
Choosing a Model, Shaping a Future: Comparing LLM Perspectives on Sustainability and its Relationship with AIAnnika Bush, Meltem Aksoy, Markus Pauly et al.
As organizations increasingly rely on AI systems for decision support in sustainability contexts, it becomes critical to understand the inherent biases and perspectives embedded in Large Language Models (LLMs). This study systematically investigates how five state-of-the-art LLMs -- Claude, DeepSeek, GPT, LLaMA, and Mistral - conceptualize sustainability and its relationship with AI. We administered validated, psychometric sustainability-related questionnaires - each 100 times per model -- to capture response patterns and variability. Our findings revealed significant inter-model differences: For example, GPT exhibited skepticism about the compatibility of AI and sustainability, whereas LLaMA demonstrated extreme techno-optimism with perfect scores for several Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Models also diverged in attributing institutional responsibility for AI and sustainability integration, a results that holds implications for technology governance approaches. Our results demonstrate that model selection could substantially influence organizational sustainability strategies, highlighting the need for awareness of model-specific biases when deploying LLMs for sustainability-related decision-making.
4.1HCFeb 9
Campus AI vs. Commercial AI: Comparing How Students and Employees Perceive their University's LLM Chatbot vs. ChatGPTLeon Hannig, Annika Bush, Meltem Aksoy et al.
As the use of LLM chatbots by students and researchers becomes more prevalent, universities are pressed to develop AI strategies. One strategy that many universities pursue is to customize pre-trained LLM as-a-service (LLMaaS). While most studies on LLMaaS chatbots prioritize technical adaptations, we focus on psychological effects of user-salient customizations, such as interface changes. We assume that such customizations influence users' perception of the system and are therefore important in guiding safe and appropriate use. In a field study, we examine how students and employees (N = 526) at a German university perceive and use their institution's customized LLMaaS chatbot compared to ChatGPT. Participants using both systems (n = 116) reported greater trust, higher perceived privacy and less experienced hallucinations with their university's customized LLMaaS chatbot in contrast to ChatGPT. We discuss theoretical implications for research on calibrated trust, and offer guidance on the design and deployment of LLMaaS chatbots.