Tether: A Personalized Support Assistant for Software Engineers with ADHD
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Equity, diversity, and inclusion in software engineering often overlook neurodiversity, particularly the experiences of developers with Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD). Despite the growing awareness about that population in SE, few tools are designed to support their cognitive challenges (e.g., sustained attention, task initiation, self-regulation) within development workflows. We present Tether, an LLM-powered desktop application designed to support software engineers with ADHD by delivering adaptive, context-aware assistance. Drawing from engineering research methodology, Tether combines local activity monitoring, retrieval-augmented generation (RAG), and gamification to offer real-time focus support and personalized dialogue. The system integrates operating system level system tracking to prompt engagement and its chatbot leverages ADHD-specific resources to offer relevant responses. Preliminary validation through self-use revealed improved contextual accuracy following iterative prompt refinements and RAG enhancements. Tether differentiates itself from generic tools by being adaptable and aligned with software-specific workflows and ADHD-related challenges. While not yet evaluated by target users, this work lays the foundation for future neurodiversity-aware tools in SE and highlights the potential of LLMs as personalized support systems for underrepresented cognitive needs.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.016 | 0.004 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".