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

+0新增论文
+0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:2026-11-08 22:53 · 全站最近入库:2026-11-08 06:02各信源进度 →

统计口径与数据新鲜度

统计 2026-11-07 23:18 — 2026-11-08 23:18(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:2026-11-08 22:53最近发现新增版本:2026-11-08 06:02库内论文最新更新时间:2026-11-06 02:59

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。

17,100 已收录论文14,661 AI 相关4,057 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 2 篇论文 · 按版本更新时间排序上轮扫描起点 2026-11-08 22:48(北京时间)
新论文 · v1arXiv:2611.08431

在伦理短文写作中为生成式AI使用搭建支架:一门入门计算课程三年经验报告

Scaffolding GenAI Use in Ethical Essay Writing: A Three-Year Experience Report in Introductory Computing

Asma Shakil, Paul Denny, Jun Seo, Gauravkumar Hirani, Sean Longyu Ma, Claus Brabrand

AI 速读 基于摘要

该经验报告基于三年六次调查与成绩关联分析,探讨在一年级计算机系统课程的伦理短文作业中,如何通过支架式负责任使用流程引导学生使用生成式AI。

cs.CY

查看原文摘要

As society, ethics, and professional practice become increasingly integrated across the computer science curriculum, technical courses need practical ways to support ethical reasoning. Ethical essay assignments offer one approach, but little is known about how students use GenAI when writing such essays. This experience report examines GenAI use across three years of ethical essay assignments in a large first-year computer systems course. Across six post-essay surveys from 2024 to 2026, we analyzed 1,894 responses, linked survey data with essay grades in 2025 and 2026, and introduced a scaffolded responsible-use workflow in 2026. Under voluntary-use policies, AI adoption remained steady at around two-thirds of students, rising above 90% when use was scaffolded. Students reported mainly using AI for help with grammar and style, while tool use diversified beyond ChatGPT in 2026. Grade-linked analyses showed that AI use did not independently predict essay quality, while marker evaluations indicated high levels of critical engagement when use was scaffolded. Overall, GenAI's pedagogical value appears to depend on how assessment design guides students to evaluate and critically engage with AI-generated suggestions.

新论文 · v1arXiv:2611.07297

Code, Commits, and Complexity in the GenAI Era: A Longitudinal Study of Team-Based Capstone Projects

Asma Shakil, Claus Brabrand, Paul Denny

原文摘要

Generative AI tools are now widely available to students, but little is known about how team-based project codebases have changed since they appeared. This matters when project courses use repository activity as evidence of progress and learning. Existing studies have largely examined self-reports, controlled tasks, or short individual assignments, leaving open questions around how student codebases evolve in authentic project settings. We present a ten-semester analysis of N=260 capstone team repositories from 2021 to 2025, spanning pre- and post-AI cohorts. We examine three dimensions: code size (lines of code), code characteristics (comment density, error-handling density, and cyclomatic complexity), and development behaviour (commit volume, edit size, and commit frequency). We find that end-of-semester codebases roughly triple, from about 3.4 KLOC in 2021--2023 to about 10 KLOC in 2024--2025. Code characteristics show a clear decoupling: cyclomatic complexity and error-handling density increase, while comment density does not. Later cohorts commit far more often and in greater volume, but individual commit sizes are largely unchanged, suggesting a shift in development rhythm rather than edit granularity. Most changes appear from 2024 onwards and are not uniformly monotonic. We did not directly observe AI use, so we report these as changes that coincide with increased GenAI availability rather than as effects of AI use. Our findings highlight the need to reconsider how student-produced artefacts are used and assessed in project courses.

cs.CY · cs.SE