Type: url
Original: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2508.11034
Status: generated
Summary
An empirical study of whether pull requests in which contributors mention using GPT are resolved faster than comparable ones that do not, drawn from 25,473 pull requests across 9,254 GitHub projects with GPT-assisted ones identified by a keyword-and-regex heuristic refined by manual verification to 95% labelling accuracy. Using multiple linear regression with controls for commit count, change size, files touched and project age, plus Mann-Whitney U tests per phase, it reports GPT-assisted pull requests merging in a median of about nine hours against twenty-three, a 66.7% shorter review phase and an 87.5% shorter wait before acceptance, with no significant difference in the change phase and no evidence of GPT use at submission or after acceptance. A labelled sample shows the assistance concentrated on enhancing existing code, fixing bugs and updating documentation rather than on writing new features or tests; the authors are explicit that confounders such as task simplicity and developer experience are only partly controlled for.