elsayedelmandoh/cisc839-assignment-1

analyzing whether agentic (ai-authored) pull requests require more review effort than human prs -- eda, hypothesis testing, and ols regression on 27,640 github prs from the aidev-pop dataset (msr'26 mining challenge). cisc839 assignment 1, queen's university.

Jupyter Notebook

0

23 commits

updated Apr 13, 2026

See the code

README

cisc839-assignment-1 -- review effort analysis of agentic pull requests

GitHub X LinkedIn

table of contents

overview

code reviewers spend significant effort on agentic (ai-authored) pull requests, but it is unclear whether that effort differs from human-authored prs. this project analyzes 27,640 merged prs from the aidev-pop dataset (msr'26 mining challenge) to answer: do agentic prs require more review effort than human prs?

the pipeline runs five staged analyses -- rq refinement, eda, hypothesis testing, ols regression, and a genai-augmented reanalysis -- using standard statistical methods (mann-whitney u, cliff's delta, statsmodels ols) on real github pr data.

the analysis finds agentic prs merge significantly faster overall (p < 0.001, cliff's delta = -0.581), with copilot as the sole exception, requiring more review effort than human prs by all three measures. the genai-augmented pipeline (part 3) adds task-type controls, reducing omitted variable bias and increasing model r-squared from 0.142 to 0.156.

key features

  • end-to-end pipeline: five notebooks cover rq refinement, eda, hypothesis testing, regression, and summary -- each notebook is independently runnable after setup.
  • non-parametric testing with effect size: mann-whitney u + cliff's delta reported for overall and per-agent comparisons, with bonferroni correction for multiple tests.
  • ols regression with model comparison: two baseline models (binary + per-agent) and three genai-augmented models, with model design rationale and diagnostic notes (jarque-bera).
  • honest data limitations: human pr review data is structurally absent in aidev; the report documents the fillna(0) directional bias and proposes the correct fix.
  • reproducible replication package: all notebooks, source code, preprocessed data, and ai prompt log packaged in a single zip.

setup

0. prerequisites

1. clone the repository

git clone https://github.com/elsayedelmandoh/cisc839-assignment-1
cd cisc839-assignment-1

2. create conda environment

conda create -n dataqueens python=3.12 -y
conda activate dataqueens
conda install pip -y
pip install -r requirements.txt

3. environment variables

create a .env file at the project root (see .env.example for required keys):

HF_TOKEN=your_huggingface_token_here

a huggingface token is required to download the aidev-pop dataset in 00-quickstart.ipynb.

usage

run the notebooks in order:

jupyter notebook
notebooktask
00-quickstart.ipynbpipeline setup -- loads raw aidev-pop tables and saves data/analysis_ready_prs.parquet. run this first.
01-part2-task1-refine-research-question.ipynbrq refinement, metric selection, scope definition
02-part2-task2-exploratory-data-analysis.ipynbeda -- 3 visualizations + descriptive stats table
03-part2-task3-hypothesis-testing.ipynbmann-whitney u + cliff's delta, per-agent bonferroni
04-part2-task4-regression-analysis.ipynbols regression -- binary and per-agent models
05-part2-task5-summary.ipynbkey findings + limitations
06-part3-task1-ai-usage.ipynbai usage documentation (part 2 vs part 3 roles)
07-part3-task2-comparison.ipynbgenai-augmented pipeline -- task-type + log-stars controls
08-bonus.ipynbnon-trivial ai mistake analysis (fillna directional bias)

deliverables

docs/02-deliverables/
  A1_Report_elmandoua_elsayed.pdf          -- 4-page report (font 11)
  A1_Replication_Elmandoua_elsayed.zip     -- replication package (notebooks + excel log)
  AI_Prompt_Log_Elmandoua_elsayed.xlsx     -- ai prompt log (purpose, prompt, how used)

references

full references are in docs/00-assignment1/01-references.md.

#reference
[1]hao li et al. aidev: studying ai coding agents on github. arXiv:2602.09185. dataset
[2]hao li et al. the rise of ai teammates in software engineering (se) 3.0. arXiv:2507.15003
[3]understanding dominant themes in reviewing agentic ai-authored code (paper 05, msr'26). arXiv:2601.19287
[4]cisc839 assignment 1 spec. queen's university, 2026

contributing

contributions are welcome. to contribute:

  1. fork the repository.
  2. create a branch (git checkout -b feature/my-change).
  3. commit with clear messages (git commit -m 'add some feature').
  4. push to your fork (git push origin feature/my-change).
  5. open a pull request.

author

elsayed elmandoh - nlp engineer

  • connect on linkedin and x via linktree

Contributors

elsayedelmandoh

23 commits

elsayedelmandoh/cisc839-assignment-1

analyzing whether agentic (ai-authored) pull requests require more review effort than human prs -- eda, hypothesis testing, and ols regression on 27,640 github prs from the aidev-pop dataset (msr'26 mining challenge). cisc839 assignment 1, queen's university.

Jupyter Notebook

0

23 commits

updated Apr 13, 2026

See the code

README

cisc839-assignment-1 -- review effort analysis of agentic pull requests

GitHub X LinkedIn

table of contents

overview

code reviewers spend significant effort on agentic (ai-authored) pull requests, but it is unclear whether that effort differs from human-authored prs. this project analyzes 27,640 merged prs from the aidev-pop dataset (msr'26 mining challenge) to answer: do agentic prs require more review effort than human prs?

the pipeline runs five staged analyses -- rq refinement, eda, hypothesis testing, ols regression, and a genai-augmented reanalysis -- using standard statistical methods (mann-whitney u, cliff's delta, statsmodels ols) on real github pr data.

the analysis finds agentic prs merge significantly faster overall (p < 0.001, cliff's delta = -0.581), with copilot as the sole exception, requiring more review effort than human prs by all three measures. the genai-augmented pipeline (part 3) adds task-type controls, reducing omitted variable bias and increasing model r-squared from 0.142 to 0.156.

key features

  • end-to-end pipeline: five notebooks cover rq refinement, eda, hypothesis testing, regression, and summary -- each notebook is independently runnable after setup.
  • non-parametric testing with effect size: mann-whitney u + cliff's delta reported for overall and per-agent comparisons, with bonferroni correction for multiple tests.
  • ols regression with model comparison: two baseline models (binary + per-agent) and three genai-augmented models, with model design rationale and diagnostic notes (jarque-bera).
  • honest data limitations: human pr review data is structurally absent in aidev; the report documents the fillna(0) directional bias and proposes the correct fix.
  • reproducible replication package: all notebooks, source code, preprocessed data, and ai prompt log packaged in a single zip.

setup

0. prerequisites

1. clone the repository

git clone https://github.com/elsayedelmandoh/cisc839-assignment-1
cd cisc839-assignment-1

2. create conda environment

conda create -n dataqueens python=3.12 -y
conda activate dataqueens
conda install pip -y
pip install -r requirements.txt

3. environment variables

create a .env file at the project root (see .env.example for required keys):

HF_TOKEN=your_huggingface_token_here

a huggingface token is required to download the aidev-pop dataset in 00-quickstart.ipynb.

usage

run the notebooks in order:

jupyter notebook
notebooktask
00-quickstart.ipynbpipeline setup -- loads raw aidev-pop tables and saves data/analysis_ready_prs.parquet. run this first.
01-part2-task1-refine-research-question.ipynbrq refinement, metric selection, scope definition
02-part2-task2-exploratory-data-analysis.ipynbeda -- 3 visualizations + descriptive stats table
03-part2-task3-hypothesis-testing.ipynbmann-whitney u + cliff's delta, per-agent bonferroni
04-part2-task4-regression-analysis.ipynbols regression -- binary and per-agent models
05-part2-task5-summary.ipynbkey findings + limitations
06-part3-task1-ai-usage.ipynbai usage documentation (part 2 vs part 3 roles)
07-part3-task2-comparison.ipynbgenai-augmented pipeline -- task-type + log-stars controls
08-bonus.ipynbnon-trivial ai mistake analysis (fillna directional bias)

deliverables

docs/02-deliverables/
  A1_Report_elmandoua_elsayed.pdf          -- 4-page report (font 11)
  A1_Replication_Elmandoua_elsayed.zip     -- replication package (notebooks + excel log)
  AI_Prompt_Log_Elmandoua_elsayed.xlsx     -- ai prompt log (purpose, prompt, how used)

references

full references are in docs/00-assignment1/01-references.md.

#reference
[1]hao li et al. aidev: studying ai coding agents on github. arXiv:2602.09185. dataset
[2]hao li et al. the rise of ai teammates in software engineering (se) 3.0. arXiv:2507.15003
[3]understanding dominant themes in reviewing agentic ai-authored code (paper 05, msr'26). arXiv:2601.19287
[4]cisc839 assignment 1 spec. queen's university, 2026

contributing

contributions are welcome. to contribute:

  1. fork the repository.
  2. create a branch (git checkout -b feature/my-change).
  3. commit with clear messages (git commit -m 'add some feature').
  4. push to your fork (git push origin feature/my-change).
  5. open a pull request.

author

elsayed elmandoh - nlp engineer

  • connect on linkedin and x via linktree

Contributors

elsayedelmandoh

23 commits

Languages

Jupyter Notebook

98.7%

Python

1.3%