跳到正文
研踪PaperTrail

YOUR RESEARCH, IN SIGHT

让下一篇重要论文,不再错过。

覆盖计算机全学科,以 AI 为快捷入口。关注方向、作者和关键词,把发现变成持续的研究积累。

部分采集异常
正在读取账号与研究记录…

全站更新概况

+2新增论文
+2其中 AI 相关
+1已有论文修订
+100新增 AI 导读

arXiv 最近完成扫描:2026-11-12 18:21 · 全站最近入库:2026-11-12 06:37各信源进度 →

统计口径与数据新鲜度

统计 2026-11-11 18:39 — 2026-11-12 18:39(北京时间) · 点击数字查看对应简报;AI 相关包含在新增论文内。

最近完成检查:2026-11-12 18:21最近发现新增版本:2026-11-12 06:37库内论文最新更新时间:2026-11-11 08:00

每分钟刷新已保存的数据。空检查不代表采集异常;新收录可能包含历史论文。AI 导读按新增版本计数。

21,675 已收录论文18,323 AI 相关6,056 有修订112 HF 社区发现

浏览论文库

时间范围跟随排序:版本更新、本站收录或首次发表。最新收录可能包含历史论文。部分信源异常,查看状态 →

找到 1 篇论文 · 按版本更新时间排序上轮扫描起点 2026-11-12 18:18(北京时间)
新论文 · v1arXiv:2611.12019

Feeling Easier, Working Harder: Cognitive Load in AI-Assisted Code Comprehension

Maryangela White, Maximilian Rose, Matthew Buckman, Amy McDonnell, Francisco Ortega, Bianca Trinkenreich

原文摘要

Software developers spend significant time reading and understanding code, increasingly supplemented by generative AI. While these tools aim to reduce the difficulty of reading code, interacting with them introduces a dual-task environment that may impose extraneous cognitive load that is challenging to capture. This study investigates how access to generative AI affects developers' real-time cognitive workload, code comprehension performance, and self-perceived code comprehension strategies. We conducted a 3x2 within-subjects study with 20 novice CS students reviewing Java code snippets of varying lengths with or without AI assistance, followed by an AI-unassisted comprehension quiz. Cognitive workload was continuously captured using a Detection-Response Task (tDRT) during both reading and quiz phases, and compared to post-quiz NASA-TLX and SEQ scores. AI assistance significantly increased objective cognitive workload, raising tDRT reaction times by 11.2%, yet participants' perceived workload remained unchanged. Code comprehension scores were high under both conditions, with no evidence that AI assistance improved comprehension at the difficulty levels evaluated; a ceiling effect limited power to detect benefits on harder tasks. Qualitatively, participants reported trusting the AI conditionally -verifying its output against their own reading for more complex snippets, but directly trusting it for simpler code- and, while many felt their reading process was unchanged, a notable subset shifted toward skimming or reading the AI's explanations in place of the code itself. These findings reveal that developers do not accurately perceive the cognitive resources they expend when managing AI tools. This study provides evidence of added cognitive effort associated with using generative AI, pointing towards a need to account for this dual-task penalty in software engineering tools and education.

cs.SE · cs.AI