From Idea to Implementation: Evaluating the Influence of Large Language Models in Software Development -- An Opinion Paper

Sargam Yadav; Asifa Mehmood Qureshi; Abhishek Kaushik; Shubham Sharma; Roisin Loughran; Subramaniam Kazhuparambil; Andrew Shaw; Mohammed Sabry; Niamh St John Lynch; . Nikhil Singh; Padraic O'Hara; Pranay Jaiswal; Roshan Chandru; David Lillis

arXiv · 2503.07450

From Idea to Implementation: Evaluating the Influence of Large Language Models in Software Development -- An Opinion Paper

Sargam Yadav·Asifa Mehmood Qureshi·Abhishek Kaushik·Shubham Sharma·Roisin Loughran·Subramaniam Kazhuparambil·Andrew Shaw·Mohammed Sabry·Niamh St John Lynch·. Nikhil Singh·Padraic O'Hara·Pranay Jaiswal·Roshan Chandru·David Lillis

View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

The introduction of transformer architecture was a turning point in Natural Language Processing (NLP). Models based on the transformer architecture such as Bidirectional Encoder Representations from Transformers (BERT) and Generative Pre-Trained Transformer (GPT) have gained widespread popularity in various applications such as software development and education. The availability of Large Language Models (LLMs) such as ChatGPT and Bard to the general public has showcased the tremendous potential of these models and encouraged their integration into various domains such as software development for tasks such as code generation, debugging, and documentation generation. In this study, opinions from 11 experts regarding their experience with LLMs for software development have been gathered and analysed to draw insights that can guide successful and responsible integration. The overall opinion of the experts is positive, with the experts identifying advantages such as increase in productivity and reduced coding time. Potential concerns and challenges such as risk of over-dependence and ethical considerations have also been highlighted.

Explore related subjects

cs.AI

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeX RIS

Sargam Yadav, Asifa Mehmood Qureshi, Abhishek Kaushik, Shubham Sharma, Roisin Loughran, Subramaniam Kazhuparambil, Andrew Shaw, Mohammed Sabry, Niamh St John Lynch, . Nikhil Singh, Padraic O'Hara, Pranay Jaiswal, Roshan Chandru, David Lillis. 2025-06-13. From Idea to Implementation: Evaluating the Influence of Large Language Models in Software Development -- An Opinion Paper. https://arxiv.org/abs/2503.07450

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

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

STRUCTUREDAGENT: Planning with AND/OR Trees for Long-Horizon Web Tasks

Existing LLM-based web agents struggle on complex, long-horizon tasks due to limited in-context memory, weak planning abilities, and greedy behaviors that lead to premature termination. To address these challenges, we propose \SA{}, a hierarchical planning framework that interleaves planning and execution via dynamic $\ANDOR$ trees. The framework separates structural planning from LLM-based reasoning, enabling principled error recovery through node repair, systematic exploration of alternatives via OR nodes, and modular plans that can facilitate human intervention. On WebArena (630 tasks), \SA{} achieves a $\sim$53\% success rate vs.\ $\sim$46\% for AgentOccam, and on complex multi-constraint Amazon shopping tasks, gains reach 10\% over the strongest baseline.

cs.AI↗

arXiv2026

Can Generalist Agents Automate Data Curation?

Curating training data is among the most consequential yet labor-intensive parts of modern AI development: practitioners iteratively propose, implement, evaluate, and revise data policies against noisy benchmark feedback. We ask whether generalist coding agents can automate this data-curation loop. We introduce *Curation-Bench*, an agent-centric benchmark that fixes the model, training recipe, and evaluation suite while giving agents command-line access to inspect data, implement policies, submit them to a fixed training/evaluation pipeline, and revise. In a vision-language instruction-tuning instantiation, out-of-the-box agents reach strong published data-selection baselines within ten iterations. However, trajectory analysis reveals a persistent *execution-research gap*: agents mainly tune local policy variants rather than explore new policy families, even when given strategy guides and paper references. Scaffolds requiring each iteration to cite, instantiate, and adapt a prior method shift agents toward method-guided exploration. The scaffolded agent autonomously composes -- without human design input -- a data-selection policy that outperforms strong published baselines at one-tenth their data budget. Overall, current agents can run the curation loop, but reliable data research requires scaffolded method adaptation, not open-ended prompting alone. Code and benchmark are open-sourced.

cs.AI↗

arXiv2026

Self-Organizing Agent Teams Learn to Reason Together

Collective intelligence depends not only on what team members know, but also on how they organize their work. When the structure of a solution is unknown, useful roles and divisions of labor cannot be specified in advance; teams must learn from experience how to organize reasoning as it unfolds. Human teams routinely adapt this way, while existing AI agent teams rely on fixed protocols, explicit task decomposition, or routing. We introduce Self-Organizing Agent Teams (SAT), fixed teams of AI agents that learn reusable strategies from prior collaborations to organize roles, conversational phases, participation, and information flow. These strategies enable what we call collaborative computation: agents exchange, challenge, repair, and synthesize partial reasoning into solutions no member produced independently. In two independent settings, we learn teamwork strategies that transfer unchanged to unseen benchmarks, using only 15 mathematics and 25 graduate-level knowledge problems. Across five mathematics and physics benchmarks, self-organizing teams average 66.7% accuracy, versus 48.8% for their strongest member, 58.7% for compute-matched inference by that agent, and 59.0% for a perfect router over members' independent answers; on AIME 2026, they exceed this router by 13.4 points. Because gains vary across benchmarks, we ask when self-organizing collaboration helps. Across eight benchmarks, demonstrability (the organizational-psychology construct of whether a team can distinguish correct from incorrect reasoning) strongly tracks improvement over the strongest member (Spearman $ρ=0.90$, $p=0.005$): teams benefit most when correct reasoning can be recognized once it appears. More broadly, these results suggest that organization itself can become an agent capability: agent teams can learn how to reason together and produce solutions their members could not reach independently.

cs.AI↗