Large Language Models (LLMs) have emerged as coding assistants, capable of generating source code from natural language prompts. With the increasing adoption of LLMs in software development, academic research and industry based projects are developing various tools, benchmarks, and metrics to evaluate the effectiveness of LLM-generated code. However, there is a lack of solutions evaluated through empirically grounded methods that incorporate practitioners perspectives to assess functionality, syntax, and accuracy in real world applications. To address this gap, we propose and develop a multi-model unified platform to generate and execute code based on natural language prompts. We conducted a survey with 60 software practitioners from 11 countries across four continents working in diverse professional roles and domains to evaluate the usability, performance, strengths, and limitations of each model. The results present practitioners feedback and insights into the use of LLMs in software development, including their strengths and weaknesses, key aspects overlooked by benchmarks and metrics, and a broader understanding of their practical applicability. These findings can help researchers and practitioners make informed decisions for systematically selecting and using LLMs in software development projects. Future research will focus on integrating more diverse models into the proposed system, incorporating additional case studies, and conducting developer interviews for deeper empirical insights into LLM-driven software development.
Z. Rasheed, Muhammad Waseem, Kai-Kristian Kemell et al.· arXiv.org· 17 citations· ⚡2
Vibe Coding (VC) is a form of software development assisted by generative AI, in which developers describe the intended functionality or logic via natural language prompts, and the AI system generates the corresponding source code. VC can be leveraged for rapid prototyping or developing the Minimum Viable Products (MVPs); however, it may introduce several risks throughout the software development life cycle. Based on our experience from several internally developed MVPs and a review of recent industry reports, this article analyzes the flow-debt tradeoffs associated with VC. The flow-debt trade-off arises when the seamless code generation occurs, leading to the accumulation of technical debt through architectural inconsistencies, security vulnerabilities, and increased maintenance overhead. These issues originate from process-level weaknesses, biases in model training data, a lack of explicit design rationale, and a tendency to prioritize quick code generation over human-driven iterative development. Based on our experiences, we identify and explain how current model, platform, and hardware limitations contribute to these issues, and propose countermeasures to address them, informing research and practice towards more sustainable VC approaches.
Muhammad Waseem, Aakash Ahmad, Kai-Kristian Kemell et al.· arXiv.org· 4 citations
Large Language Models (LLMs) offer new opportunities for automated code refactoring. However, generated changes must reduce targeted quality problems without introducing new issues or altering behaviour-relevant code structures. We introduce REFINE (Refactoring with Evidence-aware Flow for Integrated ageNtic Execution), a tool-agnostic, evidence-aware multi-agent approach for generating Java file-level refactoring candidates. REFINE combines static-analysis-guided smell identification, smell-informed planning, LLM-based transformation, automated re-analysis, preservation checks, and structured reporting. We evaluate REFINE on 450 Java files from 15 open-source systems, producing 1,350 model-pass outputs using OpenAI GPT-5.5, Google Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview, and Anthropic Claude Opus 4.8. REFINE reduces detected code smells by 68.26%, 72.79%, and 68.49% across the three configurations, respectively, with the strongest reductions observed for major smells. A matched 150-file direct-prompt baseline shows that REFINE achieves a higher median code-smell reduction with smaller edits and fewer public-method removals. However, broader quality improvements are inconsistent, and preservation checks reveal residual risks, including assert/fail-call changes and public-method removal. Therefore, REFINE outputs should be treated as refactoring candidates requiring compilation, testing, dependency analysis, and human review before adoption in repository- or system-level settings.
Muhammad Waseem, Aakash Ahmad, Pekka Abrahamsson· 0 citations