arXiv AI By Shyam Agarwal, Courtney Miller, Christian K\"astner, Bogdan Vasilescu

3100 Opinions on Code Review in an AI World: Building Causal Theory from Practitioner Discourse

Read the original on arXiv AI →

arXiv:2607. 07980v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Coding agents now author entire pull requests, and practitioners sharply disagree about what this does to code review: whether it becomes the bottleneck, whether human review is still necessary, and whether it quietly erodes the understanding that it once built.

Machine-generated by The Flow from the publisher's headline and feed description — not written or checked by a human. The full article lives at arXiv AI.

arXiv AI
Jul 7

Is Agentic Code Review Helpful? Mining Developers' Feedback to CodeRabbit Reviews in the Wild

arXiv:2607. 03316v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Agentic code review, where autonomous agents provide code review comments on pull requests, is increasingly integrated into development workflows, yet there is limited empirical evidence on how developers respond to such comments in practice.

By Hong Yi Lin, Mingzhao Liang, Kla Tantithamthavorn, Patanamon Thongtanunam
arXiv Computation and Language
Sep 16

PaperDoctor: Evidence-Grounded and Actionable Feedback for Scientific Papers in Progress

PaperDoctor is an agent framework that provides evidence‑grounded, actionable feedback for scientific papers before submission. It evaluates writing, layout, references, code, theory, prior work, and experiments through a three‑layer hierarchical system, linking each critique to specific evidence and revision suggestions. The system selectively rebuilds and reruns experiments to uncover reproducibility gaps, and an interactive interface lets authors explore findings tied to their manuscript.

By Kevin Qinghong Lin, Siyuan Hu, Pan Lu, Yu Chen, Yanzhe Chen, Owen Queen, Yupeng Chen, Jialin Yu, Junchi Yu, Zifeng Ding, Yuanfeng Ji, Sheng Liu, Jindong Gu, Linjie Li, Mike Zheng Shou, Philip Torr, James Zou
arXiv AI
Jun 12

HalluJudge: A Reference-Free Hallucination Detection for Context Misalignment in Code Review Automation

arXiv:2601. 19072v3 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Large Language models (LLMs) have shown strong capabilities in code review automation, such as review comment generation, yet they suffer from hallucinations -- where the generated review comments are ungrounded in the actual code -- poses a significant challenge to the adoption of LLMs in code review workflows.

By Kla Tantithamthavorn, Hong Yi Lin, Patanamon Thongtanunam, Wachiraphan Charoenwet, Minwoo Jeong, Ming Wu