Paper
Novice Developers Produce Larger Review Overhead for Project Maintainers while Vibe Coding
Authors
Syed Ammar Asdaque, Imran Haider, Muhammad Umar Malik, Maryam Abdul Ghafoor, Abdul Ali Bangash
Abstract
AI coding agents allow software developers to generate code quickly, which raises a practical question for project managers and open source maintainers: can vibe coders with less development experience substitute for expert developers? To explore whether developer experience still matters in AI-assisted development, we study $22,953$ Pull Requests (PRs) from $1,719$ vibe coders in the GitHub repositories of the AIDev dataset. We split vibe coders into lower experience vibe coders ($\mathit{Exp}_{Low}$) and higher experience vibe coders ($\mathit{Exp}_{High}$) and compare contribution magnitude and PR acceptance rates across PR categories. We find that $\mathit{Exp}_{Low}$ submits PRs with larger volume ($2.15\times$ more commits and $1.47\times$ more files changed) than $\mathit{Exp}_{High}$. Moreover, $\mathit{Exp}_{Low}$ PRs, when compared to $\mathit{Exp}_{High}$, receive $4.52\times$ more review comments, and have $31\%$ lower acceptance rates, and remain open $5.16\times$ longer before resolution. Our results indicate that low-experienced vibe coders focus on generating more code while shifting verification burden onto reviewers. For practice, project managers may not be able to safely replace experienced developers with low-experience vibe coders without increasing review capacity. Development teams should therefore combine targeted training for novices with adaptive PR review cycles.
Metadata
Related papers
Vibe Coding XR: Accelerating AI + XR Prototyping with XR Blocks and Gemini
Ruofei Du, Benjamin Hersh, David Li, Nels Numan, Xun Qian, Yanhe Chen, Zhongy... • 2026-03-25
Comparing Developer and LLM Biases in Code Evaluation
Aditya Mittal, Ryan Shar, Zichu Wu, Shyam Agarwal, Tongshuang Wu, Chris Donah... • 2026-03-25
The Stochastic Gap: A Markovian Framework for Pre-Deployment Reliability and Oversight-Cost Auditing in Agentic Artificial Intelligence
Biplab Pal, Santanu Bhattacharya • 2026-03-25
Retrieval Improvements Do Not Guarantee Better Answers: A Study of RAG for AI Policy QA
Saahil Mathur, Ryan David Rittner, Vedant Ajit Thakur, Daniel Stuart Schiff, ... • 2026-03-25
MARCH: Multi-Agent Reinforced Self-Check for LLM Hallucination
Zhuo Li, Yupeng Zhang, Pengyu Cheng, Jiajun Song, Mengyu Zhou, Hao Li, Shujie... • 2026-03-25
Raw Data (Debug)
{
"raw_xml": "<entry>\n <id>http://arxiv.org/abs/2602.23905v1</id>\n <title>Novice Developers Produce Larger Review Overhead for Project Maintainers while Vibe Coding</title>\n <updated>2026-02-27T10:55:43Z</updated>\n <link href='https://arxiv.org/abs/2602.23905v1' rel='alternate' type='text/html'/>\n <link href='https://arxiv.org/pdf/2602.23905v1' rel='related' title='pdf' type='application/pdf'/>\n <summary>AI coding agents allow software developers to generate code quickly, which raises a practical question for project managers and open source maintainers: can vibe coders with less development experience substitute for expert developers? To explore whether developer experience still matters in AI-assisted development, we study $22,953$ Pull Requests (PRs) from $1,719$ vibe coders in the GitHub repositories of the AIDev dataset. We split vibe coders into lower experience vibe coders ($\\mathit{Exp}_{Low}$) and higher experience vibe coders ($\\mathit{Exp}_{High}$) and compare contribution magnitude and PR acceptance rates across PR categories. We find that $\\mathit{Exp}_{Low}$ submits PRs with larger volume ($2.15\\times$ more commits and $1.47\\times$ more files changed) than $\\mathit{Exp}_{High}$. Moreover, $\\mathit{Exp}_{Low}$ PRs, when compared to $\\mathit{Exp}_{High}$, receive $4.52\\times$ more review comments, and have $31\\%$ lower acceptance rates, and remain open $5.16\\times$ longer before resolution. Our results indicate that low-experienced vibe coders focus on generating more code while shifting verification burden onto reviewers. For practice, project managers may not be able to safely replace experienced developers with low-experience vibe coders without increasing review capacity. Development teams should therefore combine targeted training for novices with adaptive PR review cycles.</summary>\n <category scheme='http://arxiv.org/schemas/atom' term='cs.SE'/>\n <published>2026-02-27T10:55:43Z</published>\n <arxiv:comment>Accepted to MSR 2026 Mining Challenge</arxiv:comment>\n <arxiv:primary_category term='cs.SE'/>\n <author>\n <name>Syed Ammar Asdaque</name>\n </author>\n <author>\n <name>Imran Haider</name>\n </author>\n <author>\n <name>Muhammad Umar Malik</name>\n </author>\n <author>\n <name>Maryam Abdul Ghafoor</name>\n </author>\n <author>\n <name>Abdul Ali Bangash</name>\n </author>\n </entry>"
}