We offer two different seminars for bachelor students at the Institute for Software Engineering and Automotive Informatics in the winter term 2026/2027.
You may use one of the following templates. You may also use your own template.
Please note: Once you watch the video, data will be transmitted to YouTube/Google. For more information, see Google Privacy
This course is supervised by Rahel Sundermann and Thomas Thüm.
The Dynamics of Decentralized Versus Centralized Development and Version Management
Context
When developers work on a project, it is common to use version control systems, e.g., git or svn. These version control systems can be centralized, where a central repository stores all the code, or distributed, where every developer has a local copy of the entire project. Both come with advantages and disadvantages and also change the dynamic of the workflow when used during development. In this work, the different dynamics, advantages and disadvantages in the development and the version management of centralized and decentralized version control systems should be investigated and discussed.
Papers
- Kıvanç Muşlu, Christian Bird, Nachiappan Nagappan, and Jacek Czerwonka. 2014. Transition from centralized to decentralized version control systems: a case study on reasons, barriers, and outcomes. In Proceedings of the 36th International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE 2014). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 334–344. doi.org/10.1145/2568225.2568284
- Singh, V., Aggarwal, A. (2024). Limitations of Centralized Version Control Systems (SVN) and Approaches to Its Migration to Decentralized VCS. In: Bhardwaj, A., Pandey, P.M., Misra, A. (eds) Optimization of Production and Industrial Systems. CPIE 2023. Lecture Notes in Mechanical Engineering. Springer, Singapore. doi.org/10.1007/978-981-99-8343-8_10
- C. Rodríguez-Bustos and J. Aponte, "How Distributed Version Control Systems impact open source software projects," 2012 9th IEEE Working Conference on Mining Software Repositories (MSR), Zurich, Switzerland, 2012, pp. 36-39, https://doi.org/10.1109/MSR.2012.6224297
AI in Open-Source Development Onboarding
Context
Onboarding new contributors in large open-source projects can be challenging, as the amount of new information on established workflows, coding conventions, guidelines, architectural design, etc. can be overwhelming. AI tools may help to ease the onboarding process by, for instance, automating setups, generating or summarizing documentation, and providing real-time code review and mentorship. Your goal is to research the current landscape of AI tools and techniques used for onboarding contributors to open-source projects. Identify and evaluate existing tools and approaches, describing how they work, their benefits, and limitations.
Papers
- Felipe Fronchetti, David C. Shepherd, Igor Wiese, Christoph Treude, Marco Aurélio Gerosa, and Igor Steinmacher. “Do CONTRIBUTING Files Provide Information about OSS Newcomers’ Onboarding Barriers?” In: Proc. Int’l Symposium on Foundations of Software Engineering (FSE). ACM, 2023, 16–28. doi: 10.1145/3611643.3616288.
- Ítalo Santos, Kátia Romero Felizardo, Igor Steinmacher, and Marco Aurélio Gerosa. “Software Solutions for Newcomers’ Onboarding in Software Projects: A Systematic Literature Review”. In: J. Information and Software Technology (IST) 177 (2025), p. 107568. doi: 10.1016/J.INFSOF.2024.107568.
- Xin Tan, Xiao Long, Yinghao Zhu, Lin Shi, Xiaoli Lian, and Li Zhang. “Revolutionizing Newcomers’ Onboarding Process in OSS Communities: The Future AI Mentor”. In: Proc. Int’l Symposium on Foundations of Software Engineering (FSE) 2 (2025). doi: 10.1145/3715767.
The Social and Technical Implications of Branches Versus Forks
Context
Version control is a vital part of software development. Nowadays, branching-based system, such as used by git, are the de-facto standard for structuring software evolution and maintaining multiple variants of a software. Over the last years, forks of software repositories get increasingly popular. Even though branches and forks behave similarly on a technical level, the typical use case scenarios differ considerably. The goal of this work is to examine the commonalities and differences in usage of branches and forks and assess potential pitfalls in development using the techniques.
Papers
- Shurui Zhou, Bogdan Vasilescu, and Christian Kästner. 2019. What the fork: a study of inefficient and efficient forking practices in social coding. In Proceedings of the 2019 27th ACM Joint Meeting on European Software Engineering Conference and Symposium on the Foundations of Software Engineering (ESEC/FSE 2019). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 350–361. https://doi.org/10.1145/3338906.3338918
- Robles, G., González-Barahona, J.M. (2012). A Comprehensive Study of Software Forks: Dates, Reasons and Outcomes. In: Hammouda, I., Lundell, B., Mikkonen, T., Scacchi, W. (eds) Open Source Systems: Long-Term Sustainability. OSS 2012. IFIP Advances in Information and Communication Technology, vol 378. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-33442-9_1
- Christian Bird and Thomas Zimmermann. 2012. Assessing the value of branches with what-if analysis. In Proceedings of the ACM SIGSOFT 20th International Symposium on the Foundations of Software Engineering (FSE '12). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, Article 45, 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1145/2393596.2393648
The Role and Effectiveness of Pull-Requests in Collaborative workflows
Context
In collaborative software development, pull-requests are frequently used as a mechanism for contributing to the software. They collect a set of proposed changes to the software, and allow project maintainers to make a decision on their inclusion. The goal of this seminar work is to provide an overview on how pull-requests are generally used, how effective they are at introducing or rejecting code changes, and what influences their effectiveness.
Papers
- D. Ford, M. Behroozi, A. Serebrenik and C. Parnin, "Beyond the Code Itself: How Programmers Really Look at Pull Requests," 2019 IEEE/ACM 41st International Conference on Software Engineering: Software Engineering in Society (ICSE-SEIS), Montreal, QC, Canada, 2019, pp. 51-60, https://doi.org/10.1109/ICSE-SEIS.2019.00014
- Moreira Soares D, de Lima Júnior ML, Murta L, Plastino A. What factors influence the lifetime of pull requests?. Softw Pract Exper. 2021; 51: 1173–1193. https://doi.org/10.1002/spe.2946
- Chandra Maddila, Sai Surya Upadrasta, Chetan Bansal, Nachiappan Nagappan, Georgios Gousios, and Arie van Deursen. 2023. Nudge: Accelerating Overdue Pull Requests toward Completion. ACM Trans. Softw. Eng. Methodol. 32, 2, Article 35 (March 2023), 30 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/3544791
The Differences Between Structured, Semi-Structured, and Unstructured Merging Techniques
Context
Version control systems are helpful tools in tracking and backing up changes within coding projects and support the collaboration with other developers. However, by working with other developers on the same project simultaneously merge conflicts within a file are inevitable. To this end, merging techniques help in resolving those conflicts. Dependent on the degree of which these techniques take the underlying syntax of the conflicting files into account, they can be classify into structured, semi-Structured, and unstructured merging techniques. Your goal is to research which techniques exists in the current literature and describe how they work, their benefits, and limitations.
Papers
- T. Mens, "A state-of-the-art survey on software merging," in IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, vol. 28, no. 5, pp. 449-462, May 2002, https://doi.org/10.1109/TSE.2002.1000449
- G. Cavalcanti, P. Borba, G. Seibt and S. Apel, "The Impact of Structure on Software Merging: Semistructured Versus Structured Merge," 2019 34th IEEE/ACM International Conference on Automated Software Engineering (ASE), San Diego, CA, USA, 2019, pp. 1002-1013, https://doi.org/10.1109/ASE.2019.00097
- Guilherme Cavalcanti, Paulo Borba, and Paola Accioly. 2017. Evaluating and improving semistructured merge. Proc. ACM Program. Lang. 1, OOPSLA, Article 59 (October 2017), 27 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/3133883
AI-based Code Explanation in Code Reviews
Context
Code reviews are widely considered as valuable technique to improve code quality and share knowledge about (anti-)patterns. However, manual code reviews are rather time-consuming. Consequently, there has been a rise of AI-powered code-review techniques that aim to reduce the overhead for developers. The goal of this work is to compare existing AI-based code review techniques and categorize them regarding their share of automated support and manual work.
Papers
- Lo Heander, Emma Söderberg, and Christofer Rydenfält. “Support, Not Automation: Towards AI-supported Code Review For Code Quality and Beyond”. In: Proc. Int’l Symposium on Foundations of Software Engineering (FSE). ACM, 2025, 591–595. doi: 10.1145/3696630.3728505.
- Juho Leinonen, Paul Denny, Stephen MacNeil, Sami Sarsa, Seth Bernstein, Joanne Kim, Andrew Tran, and Arto Hellas. “Comparing Code Explanations Created by Students and Large Language Models”. In: Proc. Conf. on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education (ITiCSE). ACM, 2023, 124–130. doi: 10.1145/3587102.3588785.
- Daye Nam, Andrew Macvean, Vincent Hellendoorn, Bogdan Vasilescu, and Brad Myers. “Using an LLM to Help With Code Understanding”. In: Proc. Int’l Conf. on Software Engineering (ICSE). ACM, 2024. doi: 10.1145/3597503.3639187.
Maintenance of Software Forks
Context
When creating different variants of a software project, it is common to clone or fork the project and make adaptations for a new variant on the cloned code. However, when fixing bug or making updates in one variant that apply to all variants, it is hard to integrate these changes into every cloned and adapted existing variant. The goal of this work is to discuss the idea behind software clones and forks, the problem(s) of maintaining them, and how they can be addressed.
Papers
- J. Businge, M. Openja, S. Nadi, E. Bainomugisha and T. Berger, "Clone-Based Variability Management in the Android Ecosystem," 2018 IEEE International Conference on Software Maintenance and Evolution (ICSME), Madrid, Spain, 2018, pp. 625-634, https://doi.org/10.1109/ICSME.2018.00072
- Poedjadevie Kadjel Ramkisoen, John Businge, Brent van Bladel, Alexandre Decan, Serge Demeyer, Coen De Roover, and Foutse Khomh. 2022. PaReco: patched clones and missed patches among the divergent variants of a software family. In Proceedings of the 30th ACM Joint European Software Engineering Conference and Symposium on the Foundations of Software Engineering (ESEC/FSE 2022). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 646–658. https://doi.org/10.1145/3540250.3549112
- Panuchart Bunyakiati and Chadarat Phipathananunth. 2017. Cherry-picking of code commits in long-running, multi-release software. In Proceedings of the 2017 11th Joint Meeting on Foundations of Software Engineering (ESEC/FSE 2017). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 994–998. https://doi.org/10.1145/3106237.3122818
AI as a Partner in Pair Programming
Context
Pair programming is a common example of Extreme Programming, where two developers work on the same code at one shared workstation. However, as developer hours are expensive, the trend to use large language models instead of a second human developer arose. It is currently unclear how this substitution impacts both developer training and code quality. Your goal is to identify common and possible applications of generative AI for pair programming and to research the changes on code quality and the impact on developer training / knowledge transfer
Papers
- Jiangyue Liu and Siran Li. “Toward Artificial Intelligence-Human Paired Programming: A Review of the Educational Applications and Research on Artificial Intelligence Code-Generation Tools”. In: J. Educational Computing Research 62.5 (2024), pp. 1165–1195. doi: 10.1177/07356331241240460.
- Nathalia Nascimento, Paulo Alencar, and Donald Cowan. “Artificial Intelligence vs. Software Engineers: An Empirical Study on Performance and Efficiency using ChatGPT”. In: Proc. Conf. Centre for Advanced Studies on Collaborative Research (CASCON). IBM Corp., 2023, 24–33. doi: 10.5555/3615924.3615927.
- Alisa Carla Welter, Niklas Schneider, Tobias Dick, Kallistos Weis, Christof Tinnes, Marvin Wyrich, and Sven Apel. “An Empirical Study of Knowledge Transfer in AI Pair Programming”. In: Proc. Int’l Conf. on Automated Software Engineering (ASE). To appear. ACM, 2025.
Mailing List-Based Collaboration in Large-Scale Open-Source Software Projects
Context
Large-scale open-source software projects such as the Linux Kernel often rely on mailing lists as a medium for collaboration. They are used to discuss features, coordinate development efforts, present contributions, and submit patches. The goal of this seminar work is to provide an overview of how such mailing lists are strucuted, moderated, and administrated, who uses them, and for what, and how they enable collaboration in projects with multiple thousand developers.
- Y. Jiang, B. Adams and D. M. German, "Will my patch make it? And how fast? Case study on the Linux kernel," 2013 10th Working Conference on Mining Software Repositories (MSR), San Francisco, CA, USA, 2013, pp. 101-110, doi: 10.1109/MSR.2013.6624016.
- A. Guzzi, A. Bacchelli, M. Lanza, M. Pinzger and A. van Deursen, "Communication in open source software development mailing lists," 2013 10th Working Conference on Mining Software Repositories (MSR), San Francisco, CA, USA, 2013, pp. 277-286, doi: 10.1109/MSR.2013.6624039.
- K. Nakakoji, K. Yamada and E. Giaccardi, "Understanding the nature of collaboration in open-source software development," 12th Asia-Pacific Software Engineering Conference (APSEC'05), Taipei, Taiwan, 2005, pp. 8 pp.-, doi: 10.1109/APSEC.2005.108.
Automated Sentiment Analysis in Software Teams
Context
"Sentiment analysis" describes the analysis of emotions and sentiments for example in development teams. Based on commit messages it is possible to detect the level of comfort various developers have while working with each other. There are some difficulties to apply general text models to the software engineering domain (kill child process, for example), which are a current point of research. Your goal is to give an overview of sentiment analysis and describe challenges when applying transformer models as well as challenges in the software engineering domain.
Papers
- Marc Herrmann, Martin Obaidi, Larissa Chazette, and Jil Klünder. “On the Subjectivity of Emotions in Software Projects: How Reliable Are Pre-Labeled Data Sets for Sentiment Analysis?” In: J. Systems and Software (JSS) 193.C (2022). doi: 10.1016/j.jss.2022.111448.
- Bin Lin, Fiorella Zampetti, Gabriele Bavota, Massimiliano Di Penta, Michele Lanza, and Rocco Oliveto. “Sentiment Analysis for Software Engineering: How Far Can We Go?” In: Proc. Int’l Conf. on Software Engineering (ICSE). ACM, 2018, 94–104. doi: 10.1145/3180155.3180195.
- Ting Zhang, Bowen Xu, Ferdian Thung, Stefanus Agus Haryono, David Lo, and Lingxiao Jiang. “Sentiment Analysis for Software Engineering: How Far Can Pre-trained Transformer Models Go?” In: Proc. Int’l Conf. on Software Maintenance and Evolution (ICSME). IEEE, 2020, pp. 70–80. doi: 10.1109/ICSME46990.2020.00017.
Automated Testing -- Are LLMs the new Holy Grail of Software Qualitsy Assurance?
Context
Software quality assurance describes processes that ensure and improve the quality of developed software and is especially important for safety-critical systems. However, it is a very complex and therefore expensive process. Motivated by that, there is currently great interest into using large language models to accelerate and improve software quality assurance. Your goal is to identify common and possible applications of generative AI for software testing in the context of software quality assurance processes, research advantages and disadvantages of automatically generated test suits for software systems, and evaluate and compare new LLM-based with traditional test generation approaches
Papers
- Shreya Bhatia, Tarushi Gandhi, Dhruv Kumar, Pankaj Jalote. "Unit Test Generation using Generative AI : A Comparative PerformanceAnalysis of Autogeneration Tools". International Workshop on Large Language Models for Code (2024). https://doi.org/10.1145/3643795.3648396
- Saswat Anand, Edmund K. Burke, Tsong Yueh Chen, John Clark, Myra B. Cohen,Wolfgang Grieskamp, Mark Harman, Mary Jean Harrold, Phil McMinn. "An orchestrated survey of methodologies for automated software test case generation". The Journal of Systems and Software 86 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jss.2013.02.061
- Chao Wang, Hao He, Uma Pal, Darko Marinov, and Minghui Zhou. "QuickCheck: A Lightweight Tool for Random Testing of Haskell Programs". Proceedings of the Fifth ACM SIGPLAN International Conference on Functional Programming (2000). https://doi.org/10.1145/357766.351266
Impact of AI on Teaching Programming to Students
Context
The use of AI tools has become more and more common for students. While there is much to gain from a versatile tool like this, there is also criticism on how it is used. Educators face the challenge on how to detect and grade AI-written solutions and the question if students retain knowledge primarily gained through AI needs to be studied. Your goal is to describe the common usage of LLMs when supporting students that learn how to program, outline the challenge of AI-based cheating and discuss the impact on the knowledge gain students have if they rely heavily on AI support.
Papers
- Tran Tri Dang, Huo-Chong Ling, and Ngoc Quang Tran. “Combating ChatGPT-Based Programming Test Cheating — An Evaluation Using Public Problems”. In: Proc. Int’l Conf. on Computer Science and Technologies in Education (CSTE). IEEE, 2024, pp. 161–165. doi: 10.1109/CSTE62025.2024.00037.
- Christian Rahe and Walid Maalej. “How Do Programming Students Use Generative AI?” In: Proc. Int’l Symposium on Foundations of Software Engineering (FSE) 2 (2025). doi: 10.1145/3715762.
- Yi-Miao Yan, Chuang-Qi Chen, Yang-Bang Hu, and Xin-Dong Ye. “LLM-Based Collaborative Programming: Impact on Students’ Computational Thinking and Self-Efficacy”. In: J. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications 12.1 (2025), p. 149. doi: 10.1057/s41599-025-04471-1.
The course material is provided in the corresponding Stud.IP course
This course is supervised by Raphael Dunkel and Thomas Thüm.
The Dynamics of Decentralized Versus Centralized Development and Version Management
AI in Open-Source Development Onboarding
Ítalo Santos, Kátia Romero Felizardo, Igor Steinmacher, and Marco Aurélio Gerosa. “Software Solutions for Newcomers’ Onboarding in Software Projects: A Systematic Literature Review”. In: J. Information and Software Technology (IST) 177 (2025), p. 107568. doi: 10.1016/J.INFSOF.2024.107568.
Xin Tan, Xiao Long, Yinghao Zhu, Lin Shi, Xiaoli Lian, and Li Zhang. “Revolutionizing Newcomers’ Onboarding Process in OSS Communities: The Future AI Mentor”. In: Proc. Int’l Symposium on Foundations of Software Engineering (FSE) 2 (2025). doi: 10.1145/3715767.
The Social and Technical Implications of Branches Versus Forks
The Role and Effectiveness of Pull-Requests in Collaborative Workflows
The Differences Between Structured, Semi-Structured, and Unstructured Merging Techniques
AI-based Code Explanation in Code Reviews
Maintenance of Software Forks
Software Composition Analysis and its Importance for Software Security
Existing Practices for Commenting and Documentation of Software Projects
Automated Sentiment Analysis in Software Teams
Continuous Integration, Delivery, and Deployment in Collaborative Software Development
Impact of AI on Teaching Programming to Students
(Automated) Team Recommendation for Collaborative Software Development
AI as a Partner in Pair Programming
The course material is provided in the corresponding Stud.IP course.
This course is supervised by Paul Bittner and Thomas Thüm.
- Caius Brindescu, Iftekhar Ahmed, Rafael Leano, and Anita Sarma. 2020. Planning for untangling: predicting the difficulty of merge conflicts. In Proceedings of the ACM/IEEE 42nd International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE '20). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 801–811. doi.org/10.1145/3377811.3380344
- M. Owhadi-Kareshk, S. Nadi and J. Rubin, "Predicting Merge Conflicts in Collaborative Software Development," 2019 ACM/IEEE International Symposium on Empirical Software Engineering and Measurement (ESEM), Porto de Galinhas, Brazil, 2019, pp. 1-11, doi.org/10.1109/ESEM.2019.8870173
- Klissiomara Dias, Paulo Borba, Marcos Barreto, Understanding predictive factors for merge conflicts, Information and Software Technology, Volume 121, 2020, 106256, ISSN 0950-5849, doi.org/10.1016/j.infsof.2020.106256
The course material is provided in the corresponding Stud.IP course.
Vacancies of TU Braunschweig
Career Service' Job Exchange
Merchandising
Term Dates
Courses
Degree Programmes
Information for Freshman
TUCard
Technische Universität Braunschweig
Universitätsplatz 2
38106 Braunschweig
P. O. Box: 38092 Braunschweig
GERMANY
Phone: +49 (0) 531 391-0
Getting here