Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

What Skills Do You Need When Developing Software Using ChatGPT? (Discussion Paper)

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2310.05998 v1 pith:OZGJ77NT submitted 2023-10-09 cs.SE cs.CY

classification cs.SEcs.CY
keywords toolsllm-basedsoftwaredevelopskillswhatkindability
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

0 comments
read the original abstract

Since the release of LLM-based tools such as GitHub Copilot and ChatGPT the media and popular scientific literature, but also journals such as the Communications of the ACM, have been flooded with opinions how these tools will change programming. The opinions range from ``machines will program themselves'', to ``AI does not help programmers''. Of course, these statements are meant to to stir up a discussion, and should be taken with a grain of salt, but we argue that such unfounded statements are potentially harmful. Instead, we propose to investigate which skills are required to develop software using LLM-based tools. In this paper we report on an experiment in which we explore if Computational Thinking (CT) skills predict the ability to develop software using LLM-based tools. Our results show that the ability to develop software using LLM-based tools can indeed be predicted by the score on a CT assessment. There are many limitations to our experiment, and this paper is also a call to discuss how to approach, preferably experimentally, the question of which skills are required to develop software using LLM-based tools. We propose to rephrase this question to include by what kind of people/programmers, to develop what kind of software using what kind of LLM-based tools.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Measuring Computational Thinking Self-Efficacy (CT-SEI): Instrument development and preliminary evaluation

    cs.CY 2026-07 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    CT-SEI is a 27-item scale that measures computational-thinking self-efficacy in a Python context and, in preliminary data, splits into create-solution and evaluate-solution factors.

Pith tools