Modeling structure and behavior of software systems plays a crucial role in the industrial practice of software engineering. As with other software engineering artifacts, software models are subject to evolution. Supporting modelers in evolving software models with recommendations for model completions is still an open problem, though. In this paper, we explore the potential of large language models for this task. In particular, we propose an approach, RAMC, leveraging large language models, model histories, and retrieval-augmented generation for model completion. Through experiments on three datasets, including an industrial application, one public open-source community dataset, and one controlled collection of simulated model repositories, we evaluate the potential of large language models for model completion with RAMC. We found that large language models are indeed a promising technology for supporting software model evolution (62.30% semantically correct completions on real-world industrial data and up to 86.19% type-correct completions). The general inference capabilities of large language models are particularly useful when dealing with concepts for which there are few, noisy, or no examples at all.

Knowledge transfer is fundamental to human collaboration and is therefore common in software engineering. Pair programming is a prominent instance. With the rise of AI coding assistants, developers now not only work with human partners but also, as some claim, with AI pair programmers. Although studies confirm knowledge transfer during human pair programming, its effectiveness with AI coding assistants remains uncertain.To analyze knowledge transfer in both human–human and human–AI settings, we conducted an empirical study where developer pairs solved a programming task without AI support, while a separate group of individual developers completed the same task using the AI coding assistant GitHub Copilot. We extended an existing knowledge transfer framework and employed a semi-automated evaluation pipeline to assess differences in knowledge transfer episodes across both settings. We found a similar frequency of successful knowledge transfer episodes and overlapping topical categories across both settings. Two of our key findings are that developers tend to accept GitHub Copilot’s suggestions with less scrutiny than those from human pair programming partners, but also that GitHub Copilot can subtly remind developers of important code details they might otherwise overlook.