跳到正文
研踪PaperTrail
← 研踪 PaperTrail

arXiv:2611.09550 · v1

Deliberate Pacing for Human Oversight in Agentic Software Development

首次提交 2026-11-06 22:57
版本更新 2026-11-06 22:57
雷达观测 2026-11-09 13:22
arXiv ↗PDF ↗

摘要

Agentic AI increasingly enables software development activities to proceed without continuous human involvement. While this autonomy may accelerate development, it also raises questions about when developers can meaningfully oversee software development done by agents. We propose deliberate pacing: intentionally adjusting when and how autonomous development proceeds to preserve opportunities for meaningful oversight. Drawing on an exploratory multivocal literature review of 20 sources, we identify three factors motivating this vision: changing relative costs of human involvement, the timing of oversight opportunities, and interdependencies between pacing decisions across the software development life cycle. We argue that neither uninterrupted autonomy nor frequent human intervention is universal. Instead, pacing should balance opportunities to understand and influence consequential decisions against costs in human attention, development time, and rework. We outline a research agenda to investigate when deliberate pacing is beneficial, how intervention timing affects oversight, and how pacing decisions interact across development activities.

AI 论文解读

基于摘要 · 非全文审阅

此版本尚未生成 AI 解读。解读由后台任务生成并按论文版本保存,登录后共享已有结果。

版本差异

目前只观测到一个版本,无法比较变化。之后收录新版本时,会在这里对照标题、作者、分类和摘要。

观测到的版本

相邻记录可能跳过中间版本;首次发现 v2 及以上也会标为版本更新。

v1 · 2026-11-06 22:57 · 最新观测版本

Deliberate Pacing for Human Oversight in Agentic Software Development

Agentic AI increasingly enables software development activities to proceed without continuous human involvement. While this autonomy may accelerate development, it also raises questions about when developers can meaningfully oversee software development done by agents. We propose deliberate pacing: intentionally adjusting when and how autonomous development proceeds to preserve opportunities for meaningful oversight. Drawing on an exploratory multivocal literature review of 20 sources, we identify three factors motivating this vision: changing relative costs of human involvement, the timing of oversight opportunities, and interdependencies between pacing decisions across the software development life cycle. We argue that neither uninterrupted autonomy nor frequent human intervention is universal. Instead, pacing should balance opportunities to understand and influence consequential decisions against costs in human attention, development time, and rework. We outline a research agenda to investigate when deliberate pacing is beneficial, how intervention timing affects oversight, and how pacing decisions interact across development activities.

查看此版本解读 →查看此版本原文 ↗