惯性聚合 高效追踪和阅读你感兴趣的博客、新闻、科技资讯
阅读原文 在惯性聚合中打开

推荐订阅源

D
Docker
阮一峰的网络日志
阮一峰的网络日志
T
Tailwind CSS Blog
博客园 - 【当耐特】
量子位
博客园 - 叶小钗
有赞技术团队
有赞技术团队
Jina AI
Jina AI
钛媒体:引领未来商业与生活新知
钛媒体:引领未来商业与生活新知
博客园 - Franky
博客园 - 司徒正美
爱范儿
爱范儿
美团技术团队
小众软件
小众软件
酷 壳 – CoolShell
酷 壳 – CoolShell
让小产品的独立变现更简单 - ezindie.com
让小产品的独立变现更简单 - ezindie.com
V
V2EX
罗磊的独立博客
freeCodeCamp Programming Tutorials: Python, JavaScript, Git & More
Last Week in AI
Last Week in AI
Hugging Face - Blog
Hugging Face - Blog
I
InfoQ
D
DataBreaches.Net
宝玉的分享
宝玉的分享

cs.SE updates on arXiv.org

VLA Foundry: A Unified Framework for Training Vision-Language-Action Models Evaluating LLM-Generated Obfuscated XSS Payloads for Machine Learning-Based Detection Do Agents Dream of Root Shells? Partial-Credit Evaluation of LLM Agents in Capture the Flag Challenges Refute-or-Promote: An Adversarial Stage-Gated Multi-Agent Review Methodology for High-Precision LLM-Assisted Defect Discovery From Particles to Perils: SVGD-Based Hazardous Scenario Generation for Autonomous Driving Systems Testing Choose Your Own Adventure: Non-Linear AI-Assisted Programming with EvoGraph Human-Machine Co-Boosted Bug Report Identification with Mutualistic Neural Active Learning LLMSniffer: Detecting LLM-Generated Code via GraphCodeBERT and Supervised Contrastive Learning Neurosymbolic Repo-level Code Localization CodeMMR: Bridging Natural Language, Code, and Image for Unified Retrieval Symbolic Guardrails for Domain-Specific Agents: Stronger Safety and Security Guarantees Without Sacrificing Utility Verification Modulo Tested Library Contracts The Semi-Executable Stack: Agentic Software Engineering and the Expanding Scope of SE Scaling Test-Time Compute for Agentic Coding AI-Assisted Requirements Engineering: An Empirical Evaluation Relative to Expert Judgment From Procedural Skills to Strategy Genes: Towards Experience-Driven Test-Time Evolution Atropos: Improving Cost-Benefit Trade-off of LLM-based Agents under Self-Consistency with Early Termination and Model Hotswap Vibe-Coding: Feedback-Based Automated Verification with no Human Code Inspection, a Feasibility Study Benchmarks for Trajectory Safety Evaluation and Diagnosis in OpenClaw and Codex: ATBench-Claw and ATBench-Codex Bounded Autonomy for Enterprise AI: Typed Action Contracts and Consumer-Side Execution AIPC: Agent-Based Automation for AI Model Deployment with Qualcomm AI Runtime Analyzing Chain of Thought (CoT) Approaches in Control Flow Code Deobfuscation Tasks Asking What Matters: Reward-Driven Clarification for Software Engineering Tasks Prompt-Driven Code Summarization: A Systematic Literature Review LinuxArena: A Control Setting for AI Agents in Live Production Software Environments LLMs taking shortcuts in test generation: A study with SAP HANA and LevelDB Large Language Models to Enhance Business Process Modeling: Past, Present, and Future Trends CollabCoder: Plan-Code Co-Evolution via Collaborative Decision-Making for Efficient Code Generation Sentiment analysis for software engineering: How far can zero-shot learning (ZSL) go? Learning from Change: Predictive Models for Incident Prevention in a Regulated IT Environment
A Software Engineering Capstone Course Facilitated By Git...
Spencer Smith, Christopher William Schankula, Lucas Dutton, Chri · 2024-10-16 · via cs.SE updates on arXiv.org

How can instructors facilitate spreading out the work in a software engineering or computer science capstone course across time and among team members? Currently teams often compromise the quality of their learning experience by frantically working before each deliverable. Some team members further compromise their own learning, and that of their colleagues, by not contributing their fair share to the team effort. To mitigate these problems, we propose using a GitHub template that contains all the initial infrastructure a team needs, including the folder structure, text-based template documents and template issues. In addition, we propose each team begins the year by identifying specific quantifiable individual productivity metrics for monitoring, such as the count of meetings attended, issues closed and number of commits. Initial data suggests that these steps may have an impact. In 2022/23 we observed 24% of commits happening on the due dates. After partially introducing the above ideas in 2023/24, this number improved to 18%. To measure the fairness we introduce a fairness measure based on the disparity between number of commits between all pairs of teammates. Going forward we propose an experiment where commit data and interview data is compared between teams that use the proposed interventions and those that do not.