Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 cited by

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 2307.08177 v3 pith:QKSQMHCM submitted 2023-07-17 cs.SE cs.AIcs.HC

Using an LLM to Help With Code Understanding

classification cs.SE cs.AIcs.HC
keywords codepluginunderstandingexplainhelpllmspromptssystem
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved
0 comments
read the original abstract

Understanding code is challenging, especially when working in new and complex development environments. Code comments and documentation can help, but are typically scarce or hard to navigate. Large language models (LLMs) are revolutionizing the process of writing code. Can they do the same for helping understand it? In this study, we provide a first investigation of an LLM-based conversational UI built directly in the IDE that is geared towards code understanding. Our IDE plugin queries OpenAI's GPT-3.5-turbo model with four high-level requests without the user having to write explicit prompts: to explain a highlighted section of code, provide details of API calls used in the code, explain key domain-specific terms, and provide usage examples for an API. The plugin also allows for open-ended prompts, which are automatically contextualized to the LLM with the program being edited. We evaluate this system in a user study with 32 participants, which confirms that using our plugin can aid task completion more than web search. We additionally provide a thorough analysis of the ways developers use, and perceive the usefulness of, our system, among others finding that the usage and benefits differ between students and professionals. We conclude that in-IDE prompt-less interaction with LLMs is a promising future direction for tool builders.

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Forward citations

Cited by 3 Pith papers

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

  1. Characterizing initial human-AI proof formalization workflows

    cs.AI 2026-06 unverdicted novelty 5.0

    A controlled user study and qualitative survey find that AI assistance raises formalization accuracy for math proofs, with users flexibly combining multiple tools while retaining oversight.

  2. "Should I Give Up Now?" Investigating LLM Pitfalls in Software Engineering

    cs.SE 2024-11 conditional novelty 5.0

    User study reveals nine LLM failure categories in SE tasks and quantifies abandonment factors from 26 participants.

  3. Investigating Conversational Agents to Support Secondary School Students Learning CSP

    cs.HC 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 4.0

    A classroom evaluation with 45 high school students finds that conversational agents can aid CSP learning by delivering context-appropriate information, comparing general and custom agent approaches for effectiveness ...