arXiv subjects

Fabio Calefato

Publications and source records attributed to Fabio Calefato.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources

arXiv2026

From Early Adoption to Sustained Use: Understanding GenAI Usage Among Software Developers in Italian SMEs

Generative AI tools are rapidly transforming software development practice, prompting unprecedented research interest. However, existing studies have predominantly examined initial adoption rather than sustained use. Understanding what drives developers to continue using these tools after initial adoption remains underexplored, particularly in small and medium-sized enterprises where resource constraints shape technology decisions differently than in large organisations. This study investigates factors associated with developers' intentions to continue using GenAI tools, adapting the UTAUT2 framework to post-adoption professional contexts. We employed a two-phase mixed-methods design. Phase 1 comprised a six-month longitudinal pilot study at an Italian software company combining surveys and interviews with 17 developers to explore how perceptions of GenAI evolve as experience accumulates. These insights informed a structural model tested in Phase 2 through a cross-sectional survey of 154 developers across Italian SMEs, analysed using PLS-SEM. The model explained substantial variance in continued use intention (R2 = 0.647), with individual-level perceptions, particularly around productivity, enjoyment, and ease of use, driving sustained adoption, whereas social and organisational factors played no significant role. These findings suggest that, for GenAI tools, post-adoption behaviour differs from initial adoption patterns: in voluntary professional contexts, sustained use is driven primarily by individual-level factors rather than by social and organisational support.

cs.SE↗

arXiv2026

Using Biometrics to Understand AI-Assisted Coding Performance and its Perception

AI-based code assistants are transforming software development, yet we lack empirical evidence on how they affect developers' cognitive processes. We present a multisite study investigating the neurophysiological correlates of AI-assisted programming through a within-subjects crossover design. We recruited participants at two universities (Bari, Italy, and Copenhagen, Denmark) and collected electroencephalography, eye-tracking, electrodermal activity, and heart rate variability data alongside a rubric-based performance score and self-reported workload across six dimensions using the NASA Task Load Index (NASA-TLX). We tested four hypotheses addressing physiological differences between AI-assisted and non-assisted conditions, the moderating role of developer experience, the association between physiology and performance, and the alignment between subjective perceptions and objective measures. Under AI assistance, the EEG $\theta/\alpha$ ratio was lower during the first task and the gaze blink rate was higher during the second, both consistent with reduced cognitive engagement when developers offload generative effort to the model. This pattern did not differ between undergraduate and graduate students. Electrodermal activity correlated with performance under the non-AI condition but not under AI. Among the six NASA-TLX dimensions of self-reported workload, only Physical demand was associated with performance under the non-AI condition but not under AI. These findings suggest that AI-assisted programming is not a faster version of solo coding but a cognitively distinct activity, with implications for the design of AI assistants and for biometric monitoring in AI-augmented development.

cs.HC↗

arXiv2026

Taking a Pulse on How Generative AI is Reshaping the Software Engineering Research Landscape

Context: Software engineering (SE) researchers increasingly study Generative AI (GenAI) while also incorporating it into their own research practices. Despite rapid adoption, there is limited empirical evidence on how GenAI is used in SE research and its implications for research practices and governance. Aims: We conduct a large-scale survey of 457 SE researchers publishing in top venues between 2023 and 2025. Method: Using quantitative and qualitative analyses, we examine who uses GenAI and why, where it is used across research activities, and how researchers perceive its benefits, opportunities, challenges, risks, and governance. Results: GenAI use is widespread, with many researchers reporting pressure to adopt and align their work with it. Usage is concentrated in writing and early-stage activities, while methodological and analytical tasks remain largely human-driven. Although productivity gains are widely perceived, concerns about trust, correctness, and regulatory uncertainty persist. Researchers highlight risks such as inaccuracies and bias, emphasize mitigation through human oversight and verification, and call for clearer governance, including guidance on responsible use and peer review. Conclusion: We provide a fine-grained, SE-specific characterization of GenAI use across research activities, along with taxonomies of GenAI use cases for research and peer review, opportunities, risks, mitigation strategies, and governance needs. These findings establish an empirical baseline for the responsible integration of GenAI into academic practice.

cs.SE↗

arXiv2026

Forecasting Developer Environments with GenAI: A Research Perspective

Generative Artificial Intelligence (GenAI) models are achieving remarkable performance in various tasks, including code generation, testing, code review, and program repair. The ability to increase the level of abstraction away from writing code has the potential to change the Human-AI interaction within the integrated development environment (IDE). To explore the impact of GenAI on IDEs, 33 experts from the Software Engineering, Artificial Intelligence, and Human-Computer Interaction domains gathered to discuss challenges and opportunities at Shonan Meeting 222, a four-day intensive research meeting. Four themes emerged as areas of interest for researchers and practitioners.

cs.SE↗

arXiv2025

Exploring Engagement in Hybrid Meetings

Background. The widespread adoption of hybrid work following the COVID-19 pandemic has fundamentally transformed software development practices, introducing new challenges in communication and collaboration as organizations transition from traditional office-based structures to flexible working arrangements. This shift has established a new organizational norm where even traditionally office-first companies now embrace hybrid team structures. While remote participation in meetings has become commonplace in this new environment, it may lead to isolation, alienation, and decreased engagement among remote team members. Aims. This study aims to identify and characterize engagement patterns in hybrid meetings through objective measurements, focusing on the differences between co-located and remote participants. Method. We studied professionals from three software companies over several weeks, employing a multimodal approach to measure engagement. Data were collected through self-reported questionnaires and physiological measurements using biometric devices during hybrid meetings to understand engagement dynamics. Results. The regression analyses revealed comparable engagement levels between onsite and remote participants, though remote participants show lower engagement in long meetings regardless of participation mode. Active roles positively correlate with higher engagement, while larger meetings and afternoon sessions are associated with lower engagement. Conclusions. Our results offer insights into factors associated with engagement and disengagement in hybrid meetings, as well as potential meeting improvement recommendations. These insights are potentially relevant not only for software teams but also for knowledge-intensive organizations across various sectors facing similar hybrid collaboration challenges.

cs.SE↗

arXiv2025

Guidelines for Empirical Studies in Software Engineering involving Large Language Models

Large Language Models (LLMs) are widely used in software engineering (SE) research and practice, yet their non-determinism, opaque training data, and rapidly evolving models threaten the reproducibility and replicability of empirical studies. We address this challenge through a collaborative effort of 22 researchers, presenting a taxonomy of seven study types that organizes how LLMs are used in SE research, together with eight guidelines for designing and reporting such studies. Each guideline distinguishes requirements (must) from recommendations (should) and is contextualized by the study types it applies to. Our guidelines recommend that researchers: (1) declare LLM usage and role; (2) report model versions, configurations, and customizations; (3) document the system and prompt design beyond the model; (4) report session traces, i.e., interaction logs and runtime traces; (5) use suitable baselines, benchmarks, and metrics; (6) include an open LLM as a baseline; (7) validate LLM outputs against human judgment; and (8) articulate limitations and mitigations. We complement the guidelines with an applicability matrix mapping guidelines to study types and a reporting checklist for authors and reviewers. We maintain the study types and guidelines online as a living resource for the community to use and shape (llm-guidelines$.$org).

cs.SE↗

arXiv2025

Self-Admitted GenAI Usage in Open-Source Software

Strategized LaTeX removal and whitespace normalization approachThe widespread adoption of generative AI (GenAI) tools such as GitHub Copilot and ChatGPT is transforming software development. Since generated source code is virtually impossible to distinguish from manually written code, their real-world usage and impact on open-source software (OSS) development remain poorly understood. In this paper, we introduce the concept of self-admitted GenAI usage, that is, developers explicitly referring to the use of GenAI tools for content creation in software artifacts. Using this concept as a lens to study how GenAI tools are integrated into OSS projects, we analyze a curated sample of more than 200,000 GitHub repositories, identifying 1,292 such self-admissions across 156 repositories in commit messages, code comments, and project documentation. Using a mixed methods approach, we derive a taxonomy of 32 tasks, 10 content types, and 11 purposes associated with GenAI usage based on 1,292 qualitatively coded mentions. We then analyze 13 documents with policies and usage guidelines for GenAI tools and conduct a developer survey to uncover the ethical, legal, and practical concerns behind them. Our findings reveal that developers actively manage how GenAI is used in their projects, highlighting the need for project-level transparency, attribution, and quality control practices in AI-assisted software development. Finally, we examine the longitudinal impact of GenAI adoption on code churn in 151 repositories with self-admitted GenAI usage and find no general increase, contradicting popular narratives on the impact of GenAI on software development.

cs.SE↗

arXiv2025

Get on the Train or be Left on the Station: Using LLMs for Software Engineering Research

The adoption of Large Language Models (LLMs) is not only transforming software engineering (SE) practice but is also poised to fundamentally disrupt how research is conducted in the field. While perspectives on this transformation range from viewing LLMs as mere productivity tools to considering them revolutionary forces, we argue that the SE research community must proactively engage with and shape the integration of LLMs into research practices, emphasizing human agency in this transformation. As LLMs rapidly become integral to SE research - both as tools that support investigations and as subjects of study - a human-centric perspective is essential. Ensuring human oversight and interpretability is necessary for upholding scientific rigor, fostering ethical responsibility, and driving advancements in the field. Drawing from discussions at the 2nd Copenhagen Symposium on Human-Centered AI in SE, this position paper employs McLuhan's Tetrad of Media Laws to analyze the impact of LLMs on SE research. Through this theoretical lens, we examine how LLMs enhance research capabilities through accelerated ideation and automated processes, make some traditional research practices obsolete, retrieve valuable aspects of historical research approaches, and risk reversal effects when taken to extremes. Our analysis reveals opportunities for innovation and potential pitfalls that require careful consideration. We conclude with a call to action for the SE research community to proactively harness the benefits of LLMs while developing frameworks and guidelines to mitigate their risks, to ensure continued rigor and impact of research in an AI-augmented future.

cs.SE↗

arXiv2025

Who "Controls" Where Work Shall be Done? State-of-Practice in Post-Pandemic Remote Work Regulation

The COVID-19 pandemic has permanently altered workplace structures, making remote work a widespread practice. While many employees advocate for flexibility, many employers reconsider their attitude toward remote work and opt for structured return-to-office mandates. Media headlines repeatedly emphasize that the corporate world is returning to full-time office work. This study examines how companies employing software engineers and supporting roles regulate work location, whether corporate policies have evolved in the last five years, and, if so, how, and why. We collected data on remote work regulation from corporate HR and/or management representatives from 68 corporate entities that vary in size, location, and orientation towards remote or office work. Our findings reveal that although many companies prioritize office-centred working (50%), most companies in our sample permit hybrid working to varying degrees (85%). Remote work regulation does not reveal any particular new "best practice" as policies differ greatly, but the single most popular arrangement was the three in-office days per week. More than half of the companies (51%) encourage or mandate office days, and more than quarter (28%) have changed regulations, gradually increasing the mandatory office presence or implementing differentiated conditions. Although no companies have increased flexibility, only four companies are returning to full-time office work. Our key recommendation for office-oriented companies is to consider a trust-based alternative to strict office presence mandates, while for companies oriented toward remote working, we warn about the points of no (or hard) return. Finally, the current state of policies is clearly not final, as companies continue to experiment and adjust their work regulation.

cs.SE↗

arXiv2024

Professional Insights into Benefits and Limitations of Implementing MLOps Principles

Context: Machine Learning Operations (MLOps) has emerged as a set of practices that combines development, testing, and operations to deploy and maintain machine learning applications. Objective: In this paper, we assess the benefits and limitations of using the MLOps principles in online supervised learning. Method: We conducted two focus group sessions on the benefits and limitations of applying MLOps principles for online machine learning applications with six experienced machine learning developers. Results: The focus group revealed that machine learning developers see many benefits of using MLOps principles but also that these do not apply to all the projects they worked on. According to experts, this investment tends to pay off for larger applications with continuous deployment that require well-prepared automated processes. However, for initial versions of machine learning applications, the effort taken to implement the principles could enlarge the project's scope and increase the time needed to deploy a first version to production. The discussion brought up that most of the benefits are related to avoiding error-prone manual steps, enabling to restore the application to a previous state, and having a robust continuous automated deployment pipeline. Conclusions: It is important to balance the trade-offs of investing time and effort in implementing the MLOps principles considering the scope and needs of the project, favoring such investments for larger applications with continuous model deployment requirements.

cs.SE↗

arXiv2024

A Multivocal Literature Review on the Benefits and Limitations of Automated Machine Learning Tools

Context. Advancements in Machine Learning (ML) are revolutionizing every application domain, driving unprecedented transformations and fostering innovation. However, despite these advances, several organizations are experiencing friction in the adoption of ML-based technologies, mainly due to the shortage of ML professionals. In this context, Automated Machine Learning (AutoML) techniques have been presented as a promising solution to democratize ML adoption. Objective. We aim to provide an overview of the evidence on the benefits and limitations of using AutoML tools. Method. We conducted a multivocal literature review, which allowed us to identify 54 sources from the academic literature and 108 sources from the grey literature reporting on AutoML benefits and limitations. We extracted reported benefits and limitations from the papers and applied thematic analysis. Results. We identified 18 benefits and 25 limitations. Concerning the benefits, we highlight that AutoML tools can help streamline the core steps of ML workflows, namely data preparation, feature engineering, model construction, and hyperparameter tuning, with concrete benefits on model performance, efficiency, and scalability. In addition, AutoML empowers both novice and experienced data scientists, promoting ML accessibility. On the other hand, we highlight several limitations that may represent obstacles to the widespread adoption of AutoML. For instance, AutoML tools may introduce barriers to transparency and interoperability, exhibit limited flexibility for complex scenarios, and offer inconsistent coverage of the ML workflow. Conclusions. The effectiveness of AutoML in facilitating the adoption of machine learning by users may vary depending on the tool and the context in which it is used. As of today, AutoML tools are used to increase human expertise rather than replace it, and, as such, they require skilled users.

cs.SE↗

arXiv2023

Assessing the Use of AutoML for Data-Driven Software Engineering

Background. Due to the widespread adoption of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Machine Learning (ML) for building software applications, companies are struggling to recruit employees with a deep understanding of such technologies. In this scenario, AutoML is soaring as a promising solution to fill the AI/ML skills gap since it promises to automate the building of end-to-end AI/ML pipelines that would normally be engineered by specialized team members. Aims. Despite the growing interest and high expectations, there is a dearth of information about the extent to which AutoML is currently adopted by teams developing AI/ML-enabled systems and how it is perceived by practitioners and researchers. Method. To fill these gaps, in this paper, we present a mixed-method study comprising a benchmark of 12 end-to-end AutoML tools on two SE datasets and a user survey with follow-up interviews to further our understanding of AutoML adoption and perception. Results. We found that AutoML solutions can generate models that outperform those trained and optimized by researchers to perform classification tasks in the SE domain. Also, our findings show that the currently available AutoML solutions do not live up to their names as they do not equally support automation across the stages of the ML development workflow and for all the team members. Conclusions. We derive insights to inform the SE research community on how AutoML can facilitate their activities and tool builders on how to design the next generation of AutoML technologies.

cs.SE↗

arXiv2023

A Lot of Talk and a Badge: An Exploratory Analysis of Personal Achievements in GitHub

Context. GitHub has introduced a new gamification element through personal achievements, whereby badges are unlocked and displayed on developers' personal profile pages in recognition of their development activities. Objective. In this paper, we present an exploratory analysis using mixed methods to study the diffusion of personal badges in GitHub, in addition to the effects and reactions to their introduction. Method. First, we conduct an observational study by mining longitudinal data from more than 6,000 developers and performed correlation and regression analysis. Then, we conduct a survey and analyze over 300 GitHub community discussions on the topic of personal badges to gauge how the community responded to the introduction of the new feature. Results. We find that most of the developers sampled own at least a badge, but we also observe an increasing number of users who choose to keep their profile private and opt out of displaying badges. Besides, badges are generally poorly correlated with developers' qualities and dispositions such as timeliness and desire to collaborate. We also find that, except for the Starstruck badge (reflecting the number of followers), their introduction does not have an effect. Finally, the reaction of the community has been in general mixed, as developers find them appealing in principle but without a clear purpose and hardly reflecting their abilities in the current form. Conclusions. We provide recommendations to GitHub platform designers on how to improve the current implementation of personal badges as both a gamification mechanism and as sources of reliable cues of ability for developers' assessment

cs.SE↗

arXiv2022

A Preliminary Investigation of MLOps Practices in GitHub

Background. The rapid and growing popularity of machine learning (ML) applications has led to an increasing interest in MLOps, that is, the practice of continuous integration and deployment (CI/CD) of ML-enabled systems. Aims. Since changes may affect not only the code but also the ML model parameters and the data themselves, the automation of traditional CI/CD needs to be extended to manage model retraining in production. Method. In this paper, we present an initial investigation of the MLOps practices implemented in a set of ML-enabled systems retrieved from GitHub, focusing on GitHub Actions and CML, two solutions to automate the development workflow. Results. Our preliminary results suggest that the adoption of MLOps workflows in open-source GitHub projects is currently rather limited. Conclusions. Issues are also identified, which can guide future research work.

cs.SE↗

arXiv2022

Pynblint: a Static Analyzer for Python Jupyter Notebooks

Jupyter Notebook is the tool of choice of many data scientists in the early stages of ML workflows. The notebook format, however, has been criticized for inducing bad programming practices; indeed, researchers have already shown that open-source repositories are inundated by poor-quality notebooks. Low-quality output from the prototypical stages of ML workflows constitutes a clear bottleneck towards the productization of ML models. To foster the creation of better notebooks, we developed Pynblint, a static analyzer for Jupyter notebooks written in Python. The tool checks the compliance of notebooks (and surrounding repositories) with a set of empirically validated best practices and provides targeted recommendations when violations are detected.

cs.SE↗

arXiv2022

Eliciting Best Practices for Collaboration with Computational Notebooks

Despite the widespread adoption of computational notebooks, little is known about best practices for their usage in collaborative contexts. In this paper, we fill this gap by eliciting a catalog of best practices for collaborative data science with computational notebooks. With this aim, we first look for best practices through a multivocal literature review. Then, we conduct interviews with professional data scientists to assess their awareness of these best practices. Finally, we assess the adoption of best practices through the analysis of 1,380 Jupyter notebooks retrieved from the Kaggle platform. Findings reveal that experts are mostly aware of the best practices and tend to adopt them in their daily work. Nonetheless, they do not consistently follow all the recommendations as, depending on specific contexts, some are deemed unfeasible or counterproductive due to the lack of proper tool support. As such, we envision the design of notebook solutions that allow data scientists not to have to prioritize exploration and rapid prototyping over writing code of quality.

cs.HC↗

arXiv2021

An in-depth Analysis of Occasional and Recurring Collaborations in Online Music Co-creation

The success of online creative communities depends on the will of participants to create and derive content in a collaborative environment. Despite their growing popularity, the factors that lead to remixing existing content in online creative communities are not entirely understood. In this paper, we focus on overdubbing, that is, a dyadic collaboration where one author mixes one new track with an audio recording previously uploaded by another. We study musicians who collaborate regularly, that is, frequently overdub each other's songs. Building on frequent pattern mining techniques, we develop an approach to seek instances of such recurring collaborations in the Songtree community. We identify 43 instances involving two or three members with a similar reputation in the community. Our findings highlight common and different remix factors in occasional and recurring collaborations. Specifically, fresh and less mature songs are generally overdubbed more; instead, exchanging messages and invitations to collaborate are significant factors only for songs generated through recurring collaborations whereas author reputation (ranking) and applying metadata tags to songs have a positive effect only in occasional collaborations.

cs.HC↗

arXiv2021

Using Personality Detection Tools for Software Engineering Research: How Far Can We Go?

Assessing the personality of software engineers may help to match individual traits with the characteristics of development activities such as code review and testing, as well as support managers in team composition. However, self-assessment questionnaires are not a practical solution for collecting multiple observations on a large scale. Instead, automatic personality detection, while overcoming these limitations, is based on off-the-shelf solutions trained on non-technical corpora, which might not be readily applicable to technical domains like Software Engineering (SE). In this paper, we first assess the performance of general-purpose personality detection tools when applied to a technical corpus of developers' emails retrieved from the public archives of the Apache Software Foundation. We observe a general low accuracy of predictions and an overall disagreement among the tools. Second, we replicate two previous research studies in SE by replacing the personality detection tool used to infer developers' personalities from pull-request discussions and emails. We observe that the original results are not confirmed, i.e., changing the tool used in the original study leads to diverging conclusions. Our results suggest a need for personality detection tools specially targeted for the software engineering domain.

cs.SE↗