Skip to content

Add AI disclosure to PR form #1634

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Open
Sevans711 wants to merge 1 commit into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from
Open

Add AI disclosure to PR form #1634

Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
1 commit
Select commit
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
15 changes: 14 additions & 1 deletion .github/PULL_REQUEST_TEMPLATE.md
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -13,7 +13,7 @@ Closes #XXX

## Expected Usage
<!-- If this PR adds a new feature, please provide a short example of it in action.
You may ignore this step if it is not applicable (comment out this section). -->
You may ignore this step if it is not applicable (delete this section). -->
```Python
import uxarray as ux

Expand Down Expand Up @@ -61,6 +61,19 @@ other_output = uxds.some_function(some_param = True)
- [ ] New notebook examples referenced in appropriate .rst file (gallery: `docs/gallery.rst`; guide: `docs/userguide.rst`; quickstart: `docs/quickstart.rst`)
- [ ] New notebook gallery examples added entry in `docs/gallery.yml` with appropriate thumbnail photo in `docs/_static/thumbnails/`


## AI Disclosure
<!-- If you did not use AI, please write "AI Usage: N/A" and remove these checklist items or mark as [N/A].
Otherwise, please briefly specify all tools used and how they were used. Include model if known. Examples:
"AI Usage: Claude (Fable 5) made all code edits, but I came up with the ideas and design for this feature myself."
"AI Usage: discussion with Gemini and ChatGPT (5.5 Instant) to help find and understand the cause of this bug."

@rljacob rljacob Jul 31, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Do we care if a developer discussed an issue with an AI if they wound up writing the code themselves?

@Sevans711 Sevans711 Jul 31, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Personally, yes, but I'm also curious to hear what others think about this.

My understanding is that using AI influences our thoughts, behaviors, work, etc, even if we do not utilize its suggestions directly. E.g., this study (with faster-to-read press release) finds that being exposed to inline autocomplete suggestions from a biased AI affects people's views, even for people who are informed about the AI's bias ahead of time.

I would guess there are probably similar studies about how your problem-solving gets affected by discussing something with an AI, though I haven't taken a close look at any papers like that yet so I could easily be wrong.

@cmdupuis3 cmdupuis3 Jul 31, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I would say no, from my experience. Having a back-and-forth with Claude is a very different workflow than just vibing it. And anyway, trying to control that would get us into the position of having to be the thought police.

@dylannelson dylannelson Jul 31, 2026 •
edited
Loading

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I agree with @Sevans711, and this distinction may matter less with time, but I think it's still good to know for now. Without knowing much about user or the model, results can be pretty unpredictable. Like Chatgpt with no access to the whole file, being prompted by a new user may have wildly different credibility than a core user/developer using Claude Code which has access to a variety of inputs, like git, other files, dependencies, and more.

I could also see myself ticking "yes" even if I wrote the code, because I'll use models as "proofreading" after writing code, and it can either expand on or validate my findings. Similar to spell check in writing products. In this case it may be nice to know that the user at least went through some form of proofreading/testing before submitting.

@cmdupuis3 cmdupuis3 Jul 31, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I guess I just don't see the ROI here. Can we imagine a situation where someone uses AI to think through a problem, writes the code themselves, takes responsibility for the code, and then... what? I can't imagine anything seriously negative happening in that situation.

@rljacob rljacob Jul 31, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I see @Sevans711 point about influencing thinking and it would be nice to have stats on that but this feels intrusive and would be discouraging. Maybe just ask "if you used AI, what model did you use?" and we'll leave "use" undefined. Definitely want the checkboxes for responsibility.

@Sevans711 Sevans711 Jul 31, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I don't think the main purpose here is to control the ways people use AI, at least, the AI Usage examples aren't trying to do that. That feels more like a job for an AI Usage Policy (which would also be good but a separate topic).

A situation I can imagine is something like: "I used AI to discuss the problem and to help me while drafting this PR. But, all the AI Usage examples in the comments were describing how it was used to edit the code. I didn't edit code with it, so I didn't actually, really use AI, then, right? All I did was discuss and take the ideas it gave me and write them up? I think I probably don't really need to worry about checking these boxes either, then. I'll just put N/A." And then later, we review and ask follow up questions, and get replies like "oh, well Claude said this is the way to go, so I think it has to be right." or "I didn't really understand that, I was just following what ChatGPT said."

In terms of ROI, I think the possible returns are high (saving reviewers' time, and reviewing PRs can take a while) though it's hard to guess their likelihood (not sure how often a situation like the one above would come up). Meanwhile, the cost feels pretty low. I would guess that it takes adds at most a minute of extra time to think about and type out a sentence like "yes I discussed this with Claude".

@Sevans711 Sevans711 Jul 31, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

this feels intrusive and would be discouraging. Maybe just ask "if you used AI, what model did you use?" and we'll leave "use" undefined. Definitely want the checkboxes for responsibility.

(Woops, didn't see your response before I sent my reply above.)

If it would be discouraging that's definitely an extra cost that I didn't consider above. Can you clarify a bit more on why it would be discouraging? Examples, maybe as simple as "taking the extra time to type something out would get annoying", or maybe more rooted in people's perceptions about AI use, like "I don't want people to think I rely on AI too much", or "I don't want my contributions to be devalued because I used AI"?

Not trying to place any judgements, just trying to understand the reasoning a bit better, if possible!

@cmdupuis3 cmdupuis3 Jul 31, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Every little bit of friction is discouraging to some extent. People's time and effort is limited, and we should be mindful of imposing too much bureaucracy where it isn't needed. A lot of projects succeed just because they're more organized and easier to work on than the alternatives.

I guess I'm way more comfortable with letting some things be a black box. I don't see this as any different from using Google or StackOverflow.

@rljacob rljacob Jul 31, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Discouraging (to new contributors) because you have to write more and possibly a lot more if you really want an accounting of every tool and LLM used and how it was used. I just want the LLM and maybe the harness.

"AI Usage: inline code suggestions from GitHub Copilot." -->

AI Usage:

- [ ] I take responsibility for all AI-generated content in my PR.
- [ ] I have tested all AI-generated content in my PR.

<!--
Thank you so much for your PR! To help us review your contribution, please
consider the following points:
Expand Down