A Comparison of Conversational Models and Humans in Answering Technical Questions: the Firefox Case
João Correia, Daniel Coutinho, Marco Castelluccio, Caio Barbosa, Rafael de Mello, Anita Sarma, Alessandro Garcia, Marco Gerosa, Igor Steinmacher
Abstract
The use of Large Language Models (LLMs) to support tasks in software development has steadily increased over recent years. From assisting developers in coding activities to providing conversational agents that answer newcomers’ questions. In collaboration with the Mozilla Foundation, this study evaluates the effectiveness of Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) in assisting developers within the Mozilla Firefox project. We conducted an empirical analysis comparing responses from human developers, a standard GPT model, and a GPT model enhanced with RAG, using real queries from Mozilla’s developer chat rooms. To ensure a rigorous evaluation, Mozilla experts assessed the responses based on helpfulness, comprehensiveness, and conciseness. The results show that RAG-assisted responses were more comprehensive than human developers (62.50% to 54.17%) and almost as helpful (75.00% to 79.17%), suggesting RAG’s potential to enhance developer assistance. However, the RAG responses were not as concise and often verbose. The results show the potential to apply RAG-based tools to Open Source Software (OSS) to minimize the load to core maintainers without losing answer quality. Toning down retrieval mechanisms and making responses even shorter in the future would enhance developer assistance in massive projects like Mozilla Firefox.
Ask about this paper
Your agent reads all of it.
Lune indexed this paper to the last equation, along with the top-tier papers that cite it. Ask a question and the answer quotes them.
Your agent calls
Luneget_paper_fulltext
Free to start. No credit card required.
Terminal
Install the CLIlune papers fulltext bada3969-a1c6-41c5-b563-012fc922a95aBuilds on13
- Retrieval-Augmented Generation for Knowledge-Intensive NLP TasksPatrick Lewis, Ethan Perez, Aleksandra Piktus, Fabio Petroni et al.NeurIPS 2020 · 19,162 citations
- Using an LLM to Help With Code UnderstandingDaye Nam, Andrew Macvean, Vincent J. Hellendoorn, Bogdan Vasilescu et al.ICSE 2024 · 264 citations
- Exploring the Potential of ChatGPT in Automated Code Refinement: An Empirical StudyQi Guo, Junming Cao, Xiaofei Xie, Shangqing Liu et al.ICSE 2024 · 107 citations
- CodePlan: Repository-Level Coding using LLMs and PlanningRamakrishna Bairi, Atharv Sonwane, Aditya Kanade, Vageesh D. C. et al.FSE 2024 · 67 citations
- How Beginning Programmers and Code LLMs (Mis)read Each OtherSydney Nguyen, Hannah McLean Babe, Yangtian Zi, Arjun Guha et al.CHI 2024 · 66 citations
Related papers
- Not All RAGs Are Created Equal: A Component-Wise Empirical Study for Software Engineering TasksQiang Ke, Yanjie Zhao, Hongjin Leng, Shengming Zhao et al.FSE 2026
- RAG Without the Lag: Enabling "What-If" Analysis for Retrieval-Augmented Generation PipelinesQuentin Romero Lauro, Shreya Shankar, Sepanta Zeighami, Aditya G. ParameswaranCHI 2026 · 1 citation
- XRAG: Examining the Core - Benchmarking Foundational Components in Advanced Retrieval-Augmented GenerationQili Zhang, Qianren Mao, Yangyifei Luo, Yashuo Luo et al.ICDE 2026 · 1 citation
- GenAssist: Interactive Prompt-Driven XR Program GenerationSruti Srinidhi, Akul Singh, Edward Lu, Anthony RoweIEEE VR 2026
- DFA-RAG: Conversational Semantic Router for Large Language Model with Definite Finite AutomatonYiyou Sun, Junjie Hu, Wei Cheng, Haifeng ChenICML 2024 · 4 citations
