ComplexCodeEval: A Benchmark for Evaluating Large Code Models on More Complex Code

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2409.10280v1
• Date: Mon, 16 Sep 2024 13:43:04 GMT
• Title: ComplexCodeEval: A Benchmark for Evaluating Large Code Models on More Complex Code
• Authors: Jia Feng, Jiachen Liu, Cuiyun Gao, Chun Yong Chong, Chaozheng Wang, Shan Gao, Xin Xia,
• Abstract summary: ComplexCodeEval is a benchmark designed to assess large language models (LLMs) in various development tasks. It includes 3,897 Java samples and 7,184 Python samples from high-star GitHub repositories.
• Score: 29.178248778212588
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: In recent years, the application of large language models (LLMs) to code-related tasks has gained significant attention. However, existing evaluation benchmarks often focus on limited scenarios, such as code generation or completion, which do not reflect the diverse challenges developers face in real-world contexts. To address this, we introduce ComplexCodeEval, a benchmark designed to assess LCMs in various development tasks, including code generation, completion, API recommendation, and test case generation. It includes 3,897 Java samples and 7,184 Python samples from high-star GitHub repositories, each annotated with function signatures, docstrings, and API references to simulate real development environments. Our experiments across ten LCMs reveal that context improves performance and that data leakage can lead to overestimation, highlighting the need for more accurate evaluations.

Related papers

• CLOVER: A Test Case Generation Benchmark with Coverage, Long-Context, and Verification [71.34070740261072]
  This paper presents a benchmark, CLOVER, to evaluate models' capabilities in generating and completing test cases. The benchmark is containerized for code execution across tasks, and we will release the code, data, and construction methodologies.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-12T21:42:56Z)
• Commit0: Library Generation from Scratch [77.38414688148006]
  Commit0 is a benchmark that challenges AI agents to write libraries from scratch. Agents are provided with a specification document outlining the library's API as well as a suite of interactive unit tests. Commit0 also offers an interactive environment where models receive static analysis and execution feedback on the code they generate.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-12-02T18:11:30Z)
• CodeTree: Agent-guided Tree Search for Code Generation with Large Language Models [106.11371409170818]
  Large language models (LLMs) can act as agents with capabilities to self-refine and improve generated code autonomously. We propose CodeTree, a framework for LLM agents to efficiently explore the search space in different stages of the code generation process. Specifically, we adopted a unified tree structure to explicitly explore different coding strategies, generate corresponding coding solutions, and subsequently refine the solutions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-11-07T00:09:54Z)
• Codev-Bench: How Do LLMs Understand Developer-Centric Code Completion? [60.84912551069379]
  We present the Code-Development Benchmark (Codev-Bench), a fine-grained, real-world, repository-level, and developer-centric evaluation framework. Codev-Agent is an agent-based system that automates repository crawling, constructs execution environments, extracts dynamic calling chains from existing unit tests, and generates new test samples to avoid data leakage.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-02T09:11:10Z)
• RepoMasterEval: Evaluating Code Completion via Real-World Repositories [12.176098357240095]
  RepoMasterEval is a novel benchmark for evaluating code completion models constructed from real-world Python and TypeScript repositories. To improve test accuracy of model generated code, we employ mutation testing to measure the effectiveness of the test cases. Our empirical evaluation on 6 state-of-the-art models shows that test argumentation is critical in improving the accuracy of the benchmark.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-08-07T03:06:57Z)
• CodeRAG-Bench: Can Retrieval Augment Code Generation? [78.37076502395699]
  We conduct a systematic, large-scale analysis of code generation using retrieval-augmented generation. We first curate a comprehensive evaluation benchmark, CodeRAG-Bench, encompassing three categories of code generation tasks. We examine top-performing models on CodeRAG-Bench by providing contexts retrieved from one or multiple sources.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-20T16:59:52Z)
• On the Impacts of Contexts on Repository-Level Code Generation [5.641402231731082]
  We present RepoExec, a novel benchmark designed to evaluate repository-level code generation. We focus on three key aspects: executability, functional correctness through comprehensive test case generation, and accurate utilization of cross-file contexts.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-17T10:45:22Z)
• VersiCode: Towards Version-controllable Code Generation [58.82709231906735]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) have made tremendous strides in code generation, but existing research fails to account for the dynamic nature of software development. We propose two novel tasks aimed at bridging this gap: version-specific code completion (VSCC) and version-aware code migration (VACM) We conduct an extensive evaluation on VersiCode, which reveals that version-controllable code generation is indeed a significant challenge.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-11T16:15:06Z)
• CodeBenchGen: Creating Scalable Execution-based Code Generation Benchmarks [35.68087697258125]
  We present CodeBenchGen, a framework to create scalable execution-based benchmarks from naturally occurring code sources. Specifically, we leverage a large language model (LLM) to sandbox arbitrary pieces of code into evaluation examples. To demonstrate the solvability of examples in Exec-CSN, we present a human study demonstrating that 81.3% of the examples can be solved by humans.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-03-31T05:20:53Z)

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.