From the hash-bound evidence releases
Recorded claims
Each claim states what the inspected source says, at the recorded location—bounded by its scope and graded by its confidence. Nothing here is a synthesis across works.
Across three field experiments involving 4,867 software developers at Microsoft, Accenture, and an anonymous Fortune 100 company, the preferred instrumental-variable/treatment-on-the-treated estimate for actual coding-assistant use induced by randomized access under imperfect compliance was a 26.08% increase in completed tasks; this is not the randomized-access intention-to-treat effect.
Scope: Software developers and measured completed tasks in three firms; not all high-skilled work or firm financial performance.
Gains were larger for less-experienced developers, reinforcing an expertise-gradient pattern, but the study does not imply that every experienced developer or mature repository benefits—an important contrast with the METR result in AIORG-C023.
Scope: Three company contexts and their coding workflows; external validity bounded.
Across three company-run randomized field experiments involving 4,867 software developers at Microsoft, Accenture, and an unnamed Fortune 100 company, the combined analysis reports more completed tasks with an AI coding assistant and larger gains among less-experienced developers.
Scope: publisher-deposited abstract metadata; universe and denominator: 4,867 developers in three named-or-characterized companies; unit: developer task completion; experimental periods are not stated in the captured abstract
The Crossref abstract describes company-run randomized field experiments evaluating how an AI coding assistant affects software-developer productivity at Microsoft, Accenture, and a Fortune 100 company.
Scope: publisher-deposited abstract-level metadata
Structured relationships
In-corpus citations
Only source-supplied cites relationships whose two endpoints are admitted are shown. Invocation evidence remains a separate relationship.
Cites (2)
Cited by (0)
No in-corpus incoming citation is available in the current enrichment coverage.
Boundaries
Limitations & independence
Recorded at coding time, carried with the work forever. A claim without its limits is not evidence.
Recorded limitations
- Abstract-level Crossref metadata only; numerical effect estimates are not restated here; the publisher Articles in Advance listing returned an access challenge.
- Abstract-level Crossref metadata only; the publisher landing page could not be retained because public retrieval was access-blocked.
- Full text was not inspected.
- Imperfect compliance means the preferred 26.08% IV/treatment-on-treated estimand is not the randomized-access intention-to-treat effect
- Less-experienced-worker heterogeneity may not transfer to other professions
- Software-development task family
- Task completion is not firm profit or software quality over the long run
- The abstract does not state experimental periods; no numerical effect-size claim is carried forward.
- Tool use and outcome logging differ across firms
Source independence
Academic/vendor-affiliated multi-company field experiments, including Microsoft, Accenture, and a Fortune 100 firm; product and employer involvement disclosed by setting.