An evaluation of LLM code generation capabilities through graded exercises

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2410.16292v1
• Date: Sun, 06 Oct 2024 09:54:54 GMT
• Title: An evaluation of LLM code generation capabilities through graded exercises
• Authors: Álvaro Barbero Jiménez,
• Abstract summary: We run a new evaluation of the performance of one state-of-the-art model (GPT4-o-mini) in solving curated coding challenges in 8 programming languages. Our analysis shows that the chance of success of the model has a positive correlation with the task difficulty. A further approximate explanatory analysis in terms of high-level features hints that while 46.6% of the model performance could be attributed to task difficulty, a 37.4% seems to be related to leakage of the challenge solutions into the model training set.
• Score: 0.7070726553564699
• License:
• Abstract: Large Language Models have shown prominent capabilities in generating functional code from natural language descriptions. However, a standardized way to evaluate these capabilities in an objective and unbiased manner is still to be found. In this paper we review the current evaluation methods available to this end, and run a new evaluation of the performance of one state-of-the-art model (GPT4-o-mini) in solving curated coding challenges in 8 programming languages, obtained from Codewars, a software development community. Our analysis shows that the chance of success of the model has a positive correlation with the task difficulty, the popularity of the programming language being used and the time elapsed since the publication of the challenge. A further approximate explanatory analysis in terms of high-level features hints that while 46.6% of the model performance could be attributed to task difficulty, a 37.4% seems to be related to leakage of the challenge solutions into the model training set, while the remaining 16% depends on the programming language. These results suggest that current evaluation methodologies might be overestimating the actual skill of Large Language Models for generating functional code.

Related papers

• SIaM: Self-Improving Code-Assisted Mathematical Reasoning of Large Language Models [54.78329741186446]
  We propose a novel paradigm that uses a code-based critic model to guide steps including question-code data construction, quality control, and complementary evaluation. Experiments across both in-domain and out-of-domain benchmarks in English and Chinese demonstrate the effectiveness of the proposed paradigm.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-08-28T06:33:03Z)
• Lessons from the Trenches on Reproducible Evaluation of Language Models [60.522749986793094]
  We draw on three years of experience in evaluating large language models to provide guidance and lessons for researchers. We present the Language Model Evaluation Harness (lm-eval), an open source library for independent, reproducible, and evaluation of language models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-23T16:50:49Z)
• Exploring the Impact of the Output Format on the Evaluation of Large Language Models for Code Translation [8.81447711370817]
  We empirically analyze the generated outputs of eleven popular instruct-tuned large language models (LLMs) Our results demonstrate that a strategic combination of prompt engineering and regular expression can effectively extract the source code from the model generation output.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-03-25T21:41:31Z)
• Language Models for Code Completion: A Practical Evaluation [13.174471984950857]
  This study provides both quantitative and qualitative assessments of three public code language models when completing real-world code. We collected real auto-completion usage data for over a year from more than 1200 users, resulting in over 600K valid completions. We found that 66.3% of failures were due to the models' limitations, 24.4% occurred due to inappropriate model usage in a development context, and 9.3% were valid requests that developers overwrote.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-25T20:43:55Z)
• L2CEval: Evaluating Language-to-Code Generation Capabilities of Large Language Models [102.00201523306986]
  We present L2CEval, a systematic evaluation of the language-to-code generation capabilities of large language models (LLMs) We analyze the factors that potentially affect their performance, such as model size, pretraining data, instruction tuning, and different prompting methods. In addition to assessing model performance, we measure confidence calibration for the models and conduct human evaluations of the output programs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-09-29T17:57:00Z)
• Large Language Models in Introductory Programming Education: ChatGPT's Performance and Implications for Assessments [0.16317061277457]
  The paper investigates the performance of the Large Language Models (LLMs) ChatGPT-3.5 and GPT-4 in solving introductory programming tasks. The results show high scores of 94.4 to 95.8% correct responses and reliable availability of textual explanations and program code.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-08-15T19:48:31Z)
• A Static Evaluation of Code Completion by Large Language Models [65.18008807383816]
  Execution-based benchmarks have been proposed to evaluate functional correctness of model-generated code on simple programming problems. static analysis tools such as linters, which can detect errors without running the program, haven't been well explored for evaluating code generation models. We propose a static evaluation framework to quantify static errors in Python code completions, by leveraging Abstract Syntax Trees.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-06-05T19:23:34Z)
• On the Reliability and Explainability of Language Models for Program Generation [15.569926313298337]
  We study the capabilities and limitations of automated program generation approaches. We employ advanced explainable AI approaches to highlight the tokens that significantly contribute to the code transformation. Our analysis reveals that, in various experimental scenarios, language models can recognize code grammar and structural information, but they exhibit limited robustness to changes in input sequences.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-02-19T14:59:52Z)
• CodeLMSec Benchmark: Systematically Evaluating and Finding Security Vulnerabilities in Black-Box Code Language Models [58.27254444280376]
  Large language models (LLMs) for automatic code generation have achieved breakthroughs in several programming tasks. Training data for these models is usually collected from the Internet (e.g., from open-source repositories) and is likely to contain faults and security vulnerabilities. This unsanitized training data can cause the language models to learn these vulnerabilities and propagate them during the code generation procedure.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-02-08T11:54:07Z)
• Coder Reviewer Reranking for Code Generation [56.80381384717]
  We propose Coder-Reviewer reranking as a method for sampling diverse programs from a code language model and reranking with model likelihood. Experimental results show that Coder-Reviewer reranking leads to consistent and significant improvement over reranking with the Coder model only. Coder-Reviewer reranking is easy to implement by prompting, can generalize to different programming languages, and works well with off-the-shelf hyper parameters.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-11-29T18:56:33Z)

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.