Leveraging LLMs for Legacy Code Modernization: Challenges and Opportunities for LLM-Generated Documentation
- URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2411.14971v1
- Date: Fri, 22 Nov 2024 14:27:27 GMT
- Title: Leveraging LLMs for Legacy Code Modernization: Challenges and Opportunities for LLM-Generated Documentation
- Authors: Colin Diggs, Michael Doyle, Amit Madan, Siggy Scott, Emily Escamilla, Jacob Zimmer, Naveed Nekoo, Paul Ursino, Michael Bartholf, Zachary Robin, Anand Patel, Chris Glasz, William Macke, Paul Kirk, Jasper Phillips, Arun Sridharan, Doug Wendt, Scott Rosen, Nitin Naik, Justin F. Brunelle, Samruddhi Thaker,
- Abstract summary: Legacy software systems, written in outdated languages like MUMPS and mainframe assembly, pose challenges in efficiency, maintenance, staffing, and security.
This paper investigates the utilization of LLMs to generate documentation for legacy code using two datasets.
We propose a prompting strategy for generating line-wise code comments and a rubric to evaluate their completeness, readability, usefulness, and hallucination.
- Score: 2.249533649156367
- License:
- Abstract: Legacy software systems, written in outdated languages like MUMPS and mainframe assembly, pose challenges in efficiency, maintenance, staffing, and security. While LLMs offer promise for modernizing these systems, their ability to understand legacy languages is largely unknown. This paper investigates the utilization of LLMs to generate documentation for legacy code using two datasets: an electronic health records (EHR) system in MUMPS and open-source applications in IBM mainframe Assembly Language Code (ALC). We propose a prompting strategy for generating line-wise code comments and a rubric to evaluate their completeness, readability, usefulness, and hallucination. Our study assesses the correlation between human evaluations and automated metrics, such as code complexity and reference-based metrics. We find that LLM-generated comments for MUMPS and ALC are generally hallucination-free, complete, readable, and useful compared to ground-truth comments, though ALC poses challenges. However, no automated metrics strongly correlate with comment quality to predict or measure LLM performance. Our findings highlight the limitations of current automated measures and the need for better evaluation metrics for LLM-generated documentation in legacy systems.
Related papers
- Automatic Generation of Benchmarks and Reliable LLM Judgment for Code Tasks [0.8274693573069442]
This work introduces a methodology to generate and evaluate LaaJ implementations, utilizing an automatically generated benchmark.
The benchmark is used both to develop and validate the LaaJs and to validate and test the LLM code related solution using the LaaJs.
Our approach enables the creation of high quality code task solutions.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-10-28T14:34:36Z) - DOCBENCH: A Benchmark for Evaluating LLM-based Document Reading Systems [99.17123445211115]
We introduce DocBench, a benchmark to evaluate large language model (LLM)-based document reading systems.
Our benchmark involves the recruitment of human annotators and the generation of synthetic questions.
It includes 229 real documents and 1,102 questions, spanning across five different domains and four major types of questions.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-07-15T13:17:42Z) - Source Code Summarization in the Era of Large Language Models [23.715005053430957]
Large language models (LLMs) have led to a great boost in the performance of code-related tasks.
In this paper, we undertake a systematic and comprehensive study on code summarization in the era of LLMs.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-07-09T05:48:42Z) - RES-Q: Evaluating Code-Editing Large Language Model Systems at the Repository Scale [3.378738346115004]
We develop RES-Q, a benchmark for evaluating Large Language Models (LLMs)
We evaluate various state-of-the-art LLMs as language agents in a repository-editing system built on Qurrent OS.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-06-24T17:08:17Z) - InfiBench: Evaluating the Question-Answering Capabilities of Code Large Language Models [56.723509505549536]
InfiBench is the first large-scale freeform question-answering (QA) benchmark for code to our knowledge.
It comprises 234 carefully selected high-quality Stack Overflow questions that span across 15 programming languages.
We conduct a systematic evaluation for over 100 latest code LLMs on InfiBench, leading to a series of novel and insightful findings.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-03-11T02:06:30Z) - 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) - ML-Bench: Evaluating Large Language Models and Agents for Machine Learning Tasks on Repository-Level Code [76.84199699772903]
ML-Bench is a benchmark rooted in real-world programming applications that leverage existing code repositories to perform tasks.
To evaluate both Large Language Models (LLMs) and AI agents, two setups are employed: ML-LLM-Bench for assessing LLMs' text-to-code conversion within a predefined deployment environment, and ML-Agent-Bench for testing autonomous agents in an end-to-end task execution within a Linux sandbox environment.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-11-16T12:03:21Z) - LLatrieval: LLM-Verified Retrieval for Verifiable Generation [67.93134176912477]
Verifiable generation aims to let the large language model (LLM) generate text with supporting documents.
We propose LLatrieval (Large Language Model Verified Retrieval), where the LLM updates the retrieval result until it verifies that the retrieved documents can sufficiently support answering the question.
Experiments show that LLatrieval significantly outperforms extensive baselines and achieves state-of-the-art results.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-11-14T01:38:02Z) - The potential of LLMs for coding with low-resource and domain-specific
programming languages [0.0]
This study focuses on the econometric scripting language named hansl of the open-source software gretl.
Our findings suggest that LLMs can be a useful tool for writing, understanding, improving, and documenting gretl code.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-07-24T17:17:13Z) - Check Your Facts and Try Again: Improving Large Language Models with
External Knowledge and Automated Feedback [127.75419038610455]
Large language models (LLMs) are able to generate human-like, fluent responses for many downstream tasks.
This paper proposes a LLM-Augmenter system, which augments a black-box LLM with a set of plug-and-play modules.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-02-24T18:48:43Z)
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.