Current research being your opinion?
Because literally every expert I personally know to be competent says that they're essentially garbage producers and don't use them beyond occasionally checking if they've improved. And no, they haven't.
The only way to get decent code from them is to be so specific that you'd be able to produce the same code in a fraction of the time you need to add all the context necessary for the LLM to figure it out.
It's like coding with a junior. Thay can produce great code too. It's just gonna take a lot of handholding if complexity skyrocks.
The only place llms got a foot hold is with generating stock art that's mostly soulless marketing material. This "industry" is going to crash so hard in the next 3 years
But if you want a sketch solution quickly, know the requirements, and can fix the silly mistakes it's a useful tool. Especially if you are doing something where you are rusty, or are used to a slightly different framework or language.
They are like a super fast but slightly clueless junior, who can hammer out mostly correct boilerplate. Not someone you want unsupervised or training a junior, but usefully in some ways.
And yes, boilerplate has disadvantages, but it has its place.
You’re not using it to be better than yourself though in your domain of expertise though.
For example if I need a very specific bash script, I can describe it to ChatGPT and get a good result far faster than I can learn the appropriate bash.
Or if I need a summary of all the config options for some package.
You can also use it to speed up your own learning. But this all depends on you being able to check the out put.