Skip to content
Review

Vibe Coding: Practice, Performance, Productivity, and Risk -A State-of-the-Art Review

Aug 2026 · 0 citations · 115 references
Computer Science

TL;DR

This state-of-the-art review assembles that evidence across a cross-disciplinary corpus spanning software engineering, human-computer interaction, labour economics, security research, governance, and education, finding the early benchmarks saturated but task-level capability uneven.

Abstract

Vibe coding - AI-assisted software development in which the developer describes intent in natural language and validates results by running rather than reading the generated code - was named by Andrej Karpathy in February 2025 and produced its first body of empirical evidence within seventeen months. This state-of-the-art review assembles that evidence across a cross-disciplinary corpus spanning software engineering, human-computer interaction, labour economics, security research, governance, and education. We survey the model landscape, the tool ecosystem, and the performance record by task type, finding the early benchmarks saturated but task-level capability uneven: reliable code generation alongside weak fault detection and hard-to-audit documentation. The productivity record is at first contradictory: peer-reviewed field experiments report +26% more tasks per week, independent randomised trials measure a 19% slowdown, and team-level telemetry shows code-review time up +441%. We argue these readings are consistent once measurement method, scope, and time horizon are held constant, and identify six patterns behind the dispersion, among them effect-shrinkage under broader measurement, self-report diverging from independent measurement, output volume conflated with productivity, and bold claims walked back once tested over longer horizons. We further document security failures in deployed applications, code-quality degradation visible in large-scale code and developer telemetry, unsettled copyright exposure, and evidence of skill atrophy. The review closes with the open research questions and one falsifiable conjecture: that the gains are real on new code and shrink or reverse on mature codebases, which would account for most of the disagreement in the record.

View source

Similar papers

Review Open access Aug 2026

The Role of AI in Application Development: A Comparative Study with Manual Coding

It is concluded that AI meaningfully augments developer productivity but does not yet demonstrably improve satisfaction or earnings, and that a hybrid human-AI model, supported by governance and training, remains the most defensible direction for application development.

Perseus Bhavnagri · 0 citations
Review Open access Aug 2026

Productivity vs. Compliance: The New Engineering Challenge of AI Coding Assistants in Regulated Codebases

A codepath-aware governance framework for AI-assisted engineering in regulated codebases, with emphasis on financial services, payments, healthcare, and other domains where software changes may affect legal, operational, privacy, and audit obligations is developed.

Ashutosh Pal · 0 citations
#computer vision Review Jul 2026

Vibe Coding in Software Development: A Multivocal Literature Review

Vibe coding is a software development practice in which developers state intent in natural language and large language models generate code. It is often framed as one-shot prompting, but the evidence describes an intent-driven, iterative workflow whose outcomes depend on how generated code is evaluated and governed. Knowledge of how vibe coding is defined, practiced, and governed is scattered across academic and practitioner sources, and, to our knowledge, existing reviews have not yet integrated both evidence streams. We conducted a multivocal literature review of peer-reviewed and grey literature following established guidelines. Searches spanned 2022 to October 2025. After screening, credibility assessment, and snowballing, 47 sources were retained (28 peer-reviewed and 19 grey) and analyzed through descriptive mapping and thematic synthesis across eight research questions. Vibe coding is consistently described as an iterative generation-evaluation-revision loop rather than a one-shot activity, and developer work shifts from writing code towards specification, supervision, and validation. Short-term productivity and time-to-prototype gains are reported in 21 of 47 sources (45%), while evidence on maintainability, long-term quality, and safeguard effectiveness remains limited. Evidence is strongest for prototyping and user-interface work and weakest for production, data-intensive, and safety-critical use, and tool visibility does not imply effectiveness. This is one of the first reviews to integrate peer-reviewed and grey literature on vibe coding under a single documented protocol. Future work should evaluate safeguard effectiveness, study session-level dynamics and long-term maintainability, and test vibe coding in production, data-intensive, and safety-critical settings.

Shahbaz Siddeeq, Muhammad Waseem, Kai-Kristian Kemell et al. · 0 citations
Preprint Aug 2026

Comparing the Quality of Code Generated by Vibe Coding Tools

The use of AI agents for automatic code generation has become increasingly common in software development. However, concerns remain about the quality of the generated code, including aspects of maintainability, readability, and long-term evolution. This study compares the structural quality of code produced by three widely adopted vibe coding tools --- Lovable, v0, and Replit --- starting from a single generation prompt. We generate three independent projects per tool, totalling nine web applications, and submit them to static analysis with SonarQube. We collect metrics such as the number of issues, severity distribution, estimated remediation effort, cyclomatic and cognitive complexity, and code duplication. Preliminary results show that the tools exhibit distinct qualitative profiles: Lovable concentrates issues of lower severity but presents a substantially higher density of code smells per KLOC, while v0 and Replit produce more code with more aggressive severity profiles. These findings suggest that choosing between vibe coding tools involves structural trade-offs that go beyond perceived productivity.

Gustavo da Mota, K. Gama · 0 citations
#software testing Preprint Aug 2026

Benchmarking the Titans: A Multi-Dimensional Empirical Evaluation of LLM Code Generation Quality in the .NET Ecosystem

An automated, multi-dimensional evaluation framework for C# code generation, applying it to four state-of-the-art LLMs: GPT, Gemini, Claude, and Grok is presented and a substantial gap between correctness and quality attributes is revealed.

Seyed Mohammad Mahdi Ghalandarian, Majid Bazargani, Masoumeh Taromirad · 0 citations