arXiv (All)
open access
How Researchers Use and Verify AI Coding Assistants: Tasks and Validation Practices in Scientific Programming
Generative AI has entered research programming, yet there is little evidence about which tasks researchers hand to it or how they decide whether its code is correct. We draw on 527 free-text responses to a 2025 survey of researchers who write code, most of them at U.S. universities. In each response
Conceptio Open Archive
Analyze & explore related research in Conceptio
Connect this record directly into your research workflow or AI agent. Explore citations across open repositories, query full text, and export structured proof bundles.
This document is indexed with metadata only: full text is not available in the archive for this record. Open the official source ↗
Related documents
- How Researchers Use and Verify AI Coding Assistants: Tasks and Validation Practices in Scientific Programming#1006921
- SWE-bench Science: Can Coding Agents Resolve Engineering Tasks in Science?#820620
- Ten simple rules for effective use of generative AI for code development in environmental science#676220
- Learning from 53.6K Real-World Developer Edits of AI-Generated Code#1109816
- Developers' Experience with Generative AI Beyond Productivity Assessment -- Insights from an Empirical Mixed-Methods Field Study#1034196
Record · ID 1036459
Retrieved via Conceptio: every document is proof-bundled with source, license, and retrieval metadata.
Retrieved via Conceptio: every document is proof-bundled with source, license, and retrieval metadata.
Bring this data into your agent: Connect via MCP or API · 20 free credits to start · no card required
Read the Docs → · View CLI source on GitHub · Conceptio Open Knowledge Archive
Read the Docs → · View CLI source on GitHub · Conceptio Open Knowledge Archive