What You Need is What You Get: Theory of Mind for an LLM-Based Code Understanding Assistant

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2408.04477v1
• Date: Thu, 8 Aug 2024 14:08:15 GMT
• Title: What You Need is What You Get: Theory of Mind for an LLM-Based Code Understanding Assistant
• Authors: Jonan Richards, Mairieli Wessel,
• Abstract summary: A growing number of tools have used Large Language Models (LLMs) to support developers' code understanding. In this study, we designed an LLM-based conversational assistant that provides a personalized interaction based on inferred user mental state. Our results provide insights for researchers and tool builders who want to create or improve LLM-based conversational assistants to support novices in code understanding.
• Score: 0.0
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: A growing number of tools have used Large Language Models (LLMs) to support developers' code understanding. However, developers still face several barriers to using such tools, including challenges in describing their intent in natural language, interpreting the tool outcome, and refining an effective prompt to obtain useful information. In this study, we designed an LLM-based conversational assistant that provides a personalized interaction based on inferred user mental state (e.g., background knowledge and experience). We evaluate the approach in a within-subject study with fourteen novices to capture their perceptions and preferences. Our results provide insights for researchers and tool builders who want to create or improve LLM-based conversational assistants to support novices in code understanding.

Related papers

• LLM With Tools: A Survey [0.0]
  This paper delves into the methodology,challenges, and developments in the realm of teaching LLMs to use external tools. We introduce a standardized paradigm for tool integration guided by a series of functions that map user instructions to actionable plans. Our exploration reveals the various challenges encountered, such as tool invocation timing, selection accuracy, and the need for robust reasoning processes.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-09-24T14:08:11Z)
• Learning to Ask: When LLMs Meet Unclear Instruction [49.256630152684764]
  Large language models (LLMs) can leverage external tools for addressing a range of tasks unattainable through language skills alone. We evaluate the performance of LLMs tool-use under imperfect instructions, analyze the error patterns, and build a challenging tool-use benchmark called Noisy ToolBench. We propose a novel framework, Ask-when-Needed (AwN), which prompts LLMs to ask questions to users whenever they encounter obstacles due to unclear instructions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-08-31T23:06:12Z)
• CIBench: Evaluating Your LLMs with a Code Interpreter Plugin [68.95137938214862]
  We propose an interactive evaluation framework, named CIBench, to comprehensively assess LLMs' ability to utilize code interpreters for data science tasks. The evaluation dataset is constructed using an LLM-human cooperative approach and simulates an authentic workflow by leveraging consecutive and interactive IPython sessions. We conduct extensive experiments to analyze the ability of 24 LLMs on CIBench and provide valuable insights for future LLMs in code interpreter utilization.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-15T07:43:55Z)
• Tool Learning with Large Language Models: A Survey [60.733557487886635]
  Tool learning with large language models (LLMs) has emerged as a promising paradigm for augmenting the capabilities of LLMs to tackle highly complex problems. Despite growing attention and rapid advancements in this field, the existing literature remains fragmented and lacks systematic organization.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-28T08:01:26Z)
• LLMCheckup: Conversational Examination of Large Language Models via Interpretability Tools and Self-Explanations [26.340786701393768]
  Interpretability tools that offer explanations in the form of a dialogue have demonstrated their efficacy in enhancing users' understanding. Current solutions for dialogue-based explanations, however, often require external tools and modules and are not easily transferable to tasks they were not designed for. We present an easily accessible tool that allows users to chat with any state-of-the-art large language model (LLM) about its behavior.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-01-23T09:11:07Z)
• If LLM Is the Wizard, Then Code Is the Wand: A Survey on How Code Empowers Large Language Models to Serve as Intelligent Agents [81.60906807941188]
  Large language models (LLMs) are trained on a combination of natural language and formal language (code) Code translates high-level goals into executable steps, featuring standard syntax, logical consistency, abstraction, and modularity.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-01-01T16:51:20Z)
• CLOVA: A Closed-Loop Visual Assistant with Tool Usage and Update [69.59482029810198]
  CLOVA is a Closed-Loop Visual Assistant that operates within a framework encompassing inference, reflection, and learning phases. Results demonstrate that CLOVA surpasses existing tool-usage methods by 5% in visual question answering and multiple-image reasoning, by 10% in knowledge tagging, and by 20% in image editing.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-12-18T03:34:07Z)
• Lessons from Building StackSpot AI: A Contextualized AI Coding Assistant [2.268415020650315]
  A new breed of tools, built atop Large Language Models, is emerging. These tools aim to mitigate drawbacks by employing techniques like fine-tuning or enriching user prompts with contextualized information.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-30T10:51:26Z)
• Creativity Support in the Age of Large Language Models: An Empirical Study Involving Emerging Writers [33.3564201174124]
  We investigate the utility of modern large language models in assisting professional writers via an empirical user study. We find that while writers seek LLM's help across all three types of cognitive activities, they find LLMs more helpful in translation and reviewing.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-09-22T01:49:36Z)
• MINT: Evaluating LLMs in Multi-turn Interaction with Tools and Language Feedback [78.60644407028022]
  We introduce MINT, a benchmark that evaluates large language models' ability to solve tasks with multi-turn interactions. LLMs generally benefit from tools and language feedback, with performance gains of 1-8% for each turn of tool use. LLMs evaluated, supervised instruction-finetuning (SIFT) and reinforcement learning from human feedback (RLHF) generally hurt multi-turn capabilities.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-09-19T15:25:42Z)
• Large Language Models are Few-Shot Summarizers: Multi-Intent Comment Generation via In-Context Learning [34.006227676170504]
  This study investigates the feasibility of utilizing large language models (LLMs) to generate comments that can fulfill developers' diverse intents. Experiments on two large-scale datasets demonstrate the rationale of our insights.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-04-22T12:26:24Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.