Search arXiv⌕ Search
Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 2501.02088

Curious, Critical Thinker, Empathetic, and Ethically Responsible: Essential Soft Skills for Data Scientists in Software Engineering

Matheus de Morais Leça·Ronnie de Souza Santos
View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Background. As artificial intelligence and AI-powered systems continue to grow, the role of data scientists has become essential in software development environments. Data scientists face challenges related to managing large volumes of data and addressing the societal impacts of AI algorithms, which require a broad range of soft skills. Goal. This study aims to identify the key soft skills that data scientists need when working on AI-powered projects, with a particular focus on addressing biases that affect society. Method. We conducted a thematic analysis of 87 job postings on LinkedIn and 11 interviews with industry practitioners. The job postings came from companies in 12 countries and covered various experience levels. The interviews featured professionals from diverse backgrounds, including different genders, ethnicities, and sexual orientations, who worked with clients from South America, North America, and Europe. Results. While data scientists share many skills with other software practitioners -- such as those related to coordination, engineering, and management -- there is a growing emphasis on innovation and social responsibility. These include soft skills like curiosity, critical thinking, empathy, and ethical awareness, which are essential for addressing the ethical and societal implications of AI. Conclusion. Our findings indicate that data scientists working on AI-powered projects require not only technical expertise but also a solid foundation in soft skills that enable them to build AI systems responsibly, with fairness and inclusivity. These insights have important implications for recruitment and training within software companies and for ensuring the long-term success of AI-powered systems and their broader societal impact.

Explore related subjects

cs.SE

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Matheus de Morais Leça, Ronnie de Souza Santos. 2025-01-29. Curious, Critical Thinker, Empathetic, and Ethically Responsible: Essential Soft Skills for Data Scientists in Software Engineering. https://arxiv.org/abs/2501.02088

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

Is Vibe Coding Safe? Benchmarking Vulnerability of Agent-Generated Code in Real-World Tasks

Vibe coding is a new software development paradigm in which human engineers prompt a large language model (LLM) agent to complete complex coding tasks with little supervision. Although vibe coding is increasingly adopted, is the generated code really safe to deploy in production? To investigate this question, we propose SUSVIBES, a benchmark consisting of 186 feature-request software engineering tasks from real-world open-source projects, for which, human programmers committed vulnerable implementations. We evaluate 12 widely used coding agentic settings with frontier models on the benchmark. Disturbingly, all agents perform poorly in terms of software security. Although 57% of the solutions from SWE-Agent with Claude 4 Sonnet are functionally correct, only 11.8% are secure. Further experiments demonstrate that preliminary security strategies, such as augmenting the feature request with vulnerability hints, cannot mitigate these security issues. Our findings raise serious concerns about the widespread adoption of vibe coding, particularly in security-sensitive applications. The code and dataset are available at https://github.com/LeiLiLab/susvibes. The leaderboard is at https://leililab.github.io/susvibes-leaderboard.

cs.SE↗
arXiv2026

Why3-py: A Tool for Formal Verification of Hypothesis Testing and Meta-Analysis in Python

The reproducibility crisis in scientific research has received widespread recognition, thereby increasing the importance of meta-analyses that integrate statistical analyses from multiple studies. However, statistical methods often have ambiguous and implicit underlying assumptions, which can lead to their erroneous applications and interpretations. To address this issue, we propose a formal verification framework for statistical Python programs. Specifically, we present Why3-py, a Python front-end for the Why3 verification platform that transforms Python code into verification-oriented WhyML representations, addressing the challenges arising from Python's dynamic typing and runtime polymorphism. Furthermore, we extend the StatWhy tool to support the verification of meta-analysis methods. These tools enable meta-analysts to identify overlooked assumptions and misuse of analyses, and to verify the correct use of hypothesis testing and meta-analysis methods in Python code.

cs.SE↗
arXiv2026

What is the Difference Between Me and You? Benchmarking the Quality Gap Between Human-Written and AI-Generated Code

AI coding assistants are becoming co-authors of production software, yet their evaluation centers on functional correctness, leaving open whether their code differs from human code in the quality dimensions dominating lifecycle cost. We compare human-written and AI-generated code at scale: 787,562 function pairs across Python, Java, and C, each human function mined from open-source repositories paired with implementations generated from its docstring by three AI assistants (OpenAI GPT models, DeepSeek-Coder, Qwen2.5-Coder). We characterize structural complexity and statistical naturalness, and map static-analysis findings onto Orthogonal Defect Classification for defects and the Common Weakness Enumeration for vulnerabilities, making authors and languages directly comparable. AI-generated code is structurally compressed and stylistically templated: roughly half the size and branching of human code, clustering apart at the style level. Defect profiles differ in kind: human code concentrates issues of mature codebases, AI code repetitive boilerplate; security is language-dependent, with LLMs producing more, and more severe, findings in Python and Java but fewer high-severity memory-safety findings than humans in C. Once size is controlled for, complexity metrics carry little signal, while naturalness separates authors. Finally, we release CQBench, a benchmark of 27,346 issue-prone tasks with baselines and an evaluation pipeline for quality assurance and security testing.

cs.SE↗