Insights from Benchmarking Frontier Language Models on Web App Code Generation

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2409.05177v1
• Date: Sun, 8 Sep 2024 18:24:26 GMT
• Title: Insights from Benchmarking Frontier Language Models on Web App Code Generation
• Authors: Yi Cui,
• Abstract summary: This paper presents insights from evaluating 16 frontier large language models (LLMs) on the WebApp1K benchmark. The results reveal that while all models possess similar underlying knowledge, their performance is differentiated by the frequency of mistakes they make.
• Score: 1.7268889851975326
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: This paper presents insights from evaluating 16 frontier large language models (LLMs) on the WebApp1K benchmark, a test suite designed to assess the ability of LLMs to generate web application code. The results reveal that while all models possess similar underlying knowledge, their performance is differentiated by the frequency of mistakes they make. By analyzing lines of code (LOC) and failure distributions, we find that writing correct code is more complex than generating incorrect code. Furthermore, prompt engineering shows limited efficacy in reducing errors beyond specific cases. These findings suggest that further advancements in coding LLM should emphasize on model reliability and mistake minimization.

Related papers

• A Deep Dive Into Large Language Model Code Generation Mistakes: What and Why? [9.246899995643918]
  Large Language Models can still generate defective code that deviates from the specification. Seven categories of non-syntactic mistakes were identified through extensive manual analyses. Our evaluation demonstrated that GPT-4 with the ReAct prompting technique can achieve an F1 score of up to 0.65 when identifying reasons for LLM's mistakes.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-11-03T02:47:03Z)
• Can OpenSource beat ChatGPT? -- A Comparative Study of Large Language Models for Text-to-Code Generation [0.24578723416255752]
  We evaluate five different large language models (LLMs) concerning their capabilities for text-to-code generation. ChatGPT can handle these typical programming challenges by far the most effectively, surpassing even code-specialized models like Code Llama.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-09-06T10:03:49Z)
• What's Wrong with Your Code Generated by Large Language Models? An Extensive Study [80.18342600996601]
  Large language models (LLMs) produce code that is shorter yet more complicated as compared to canonical solutions. We develop a taxonomy of bugs for incorrect codes that includes three categories and 12 sub-categories, and analyze the root cause for common bug types. We propose a novel training-free iterative method that introduces self-critique, enabling LLMs to critique and correct their generated code based on bug types and compiler feedback.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-08T17:27:17Z)
• LLMs-as-Instructors: Learning from Errors Toward Automating Model Improvement [93.38736019287224]
  "LLMs-as-Instructors" framework autonomously enhances the training of smaller target models. Inspired by the theory of "Learning from Errors", this framework employs an instructor LLM to meticulously analyze the specific errors within a target model. Within this framework, we implement two strategies: "Learning from Error," which focuses solely on incorrect responses to tailor training data, and "Learning from Error by Contrast", which uses contrastive learning to analyze both correct and incorrect responses for a deeper understanding of errors.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-29T17:16:04Z)
• DALD: Improving Logits-based Detector without Logits from Black-box LLMs [56.234109491884126]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) have revolutionized text generation, producing outputs that closely mimic human writing. We present Distribution-Aligned LLMs Detection (DALD), an innovative framework that redefines the state-of-the-art performance in black-box text detection. DALD is designed to align the surrogate model's distribution with that of unknown target LLMs, ensuring enhanced detection capability and resilience against rapid model iterations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-07T19:38:05Z)
• Perplexed: Understanding When Large Language Models are Confused [3.4208414448496027]
  This paper introduces perplexed, a library for exploring where a language model is perplexed. We conducted a case study focused on Large Language Models (LLMs) for code generation using an additional tool we built to help with the analysis of code models called codetokenizer. We found that our studied code LLMs had their worst performance on coding structures where the code was not syntactically correct.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-04-09T22:03:39Z)
• Test-Case-Driven Programming Understanding in Large Language Models for Better Code Generation [15.166827643436346]
  muFiX is a novel prompting technique to improve the code generation performance of large language models (LLMs) It first exploits test case analysis to obtain specification understanding and enables a self-improvement process. muFiX further fixes the specification understanding towards the direction reducing the gap between the provided understanding and the actual understanding.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-09-28T02:58:07Z)
• LLMs as Factual Reasoners: Insights from Existing Benchmarks and Beyond [135.8013388183257]
  We propose a new protocol for inconsistency detection benchmark creation and implement it in a 10-domain benchmark called SummEdits. Most LLMs struggle on SummEdits, with performance close to random chance. The best-performing model, GPT-4, is still 8% below estimated human performance.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-23T21:50:06Z)
• LEVER: Learning to Verify Language-to-Code Generation with Execution [64.36459105535]
  We propose LEVER, a simple approach to improve language-to-code generation by learning to verify the generated programs with their execution results. Specifically, we train verifiers to determine whether a program sampled from the LLMs is correct or not based on the natural language input, the program itself and its execution results. LEVER consistently improves over the base code LLMs(4.6% to 10.9% with code-davinci) and achieves new state-of-the-art results on all of them.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-02-16T18:23:22Z)
• Fault-Aware Neural Code Rankers [64.41888054066861]
  We propose fault-aware neural code rankers that can predict the correctness of a sampled program without executing it. Our fault-aware rankers can significantly increase the pass@1 accuracy of various code generation models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-06-04T22:01:05Z)

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.