A Preliminary Study of Multilingual Code Language Models for Code Generation Task Using Translated Benchmarks

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2411.15470v1
• Date: Sat, 23 Nov 2024 06:40:47 GMT
• Title: A Preliminary Study of Multilingual Code Language Models for Code Generation Task Using Translated Benchmarks
• Authors: Rohit Dandamudi, Gema Rodríguez-Pérez,
• Abstract summary: We evaluate the performance of Poly-Coder, a pioneering open-source, multilingual CLM built for code generation. Our results suggest that the outcomes observed in these translated benchmarks align well with evaluation metrics used during the training phase. These initial insights highlight the need for more comprehensive empirical studies.
• Score: 0.0
• License:
• Abstract: Evaluating the performance of Code Language Models (CLMs) for software engineering tasks, especially in multilingual and low-resource programming language settings, poses significant challenges. These challenges are primarily due to the lack of high-quality benchmarks across various programming languages and the imbalanced nature of the CLMs training corpus. Although recent advances in one of the common downstream tasks, code generation, have shown promise by introducing translated benchmarks using different methodologies, there is a current lack of empirical evidence assessing these benchmarks. To address this gap, we conducted a preliminary study to evaluate the performance of Poly-Coder, a pioneering open-source, multilingual CLM built for code generation. We utilized two existing state-of-the-art translations of the popular code generation benchmark, HumanEval, facilitated by the OctoPack and MultiPL-E studies. Our results suggest that the outcomes observed in these translated benchmarks align well with evaluation metrics used during the training phase, such as perplexity, thereby validating their effectiveness in estimating the performance of CLMs. However, we identified several inconsistencies in the CLMs' performance across the translated benchmarks and encountered challenges in replicating the results. These initial insights highlight the need for more comprehensive empirical studies to fully understand translated benchmarks' methodological approaches, limitations, and reproducibility. Such studies are essential to ensure their reliability before they are widely adopted.

Related papers

• P-MMEval: A Parallel Multilingual Multitask Benchmark for Consistent Evaluation of LLMs [84.24644520272835]
  Large language models (LLMs) showcase varied multilingual capabilities across tasks like translation, code generation, and reasoning. Previous assessments often limited their scope to fundamental natural language processing (NLP) or isolated capability-specific tasks. We present a pipeline for selecting available and reasonable benchmarks from massive ones, addressing the oversight in previous work regarding the utility of these benchmarks. We introduce P-MMEval, a large-scale benchmark covering effective fundamental and capability-specialized datasets.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-11-14T01:29:36Z)
• Escalating LLM-based Code Translation Benchmarking into the Class-level Era [20.22104136730419]
  ClassEval-T is a class-level code translation benchmark for Large Language Models (LLMs) Built upon ClassEval, ClassEval-T extends into Java and C++ with complete code samples and test suites, requiring 360 person-hours for manual migration.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-11-09T11:13:14Z)
• mHumanEval -- A Multilingual Benchmark to Evaluate Large Language Models for Code Generation [28.531581489405745]
  mHumanEval is an extended benchmark supporting prompts in over 200 natural languages. We provide expert human translations for 15 diverse natural languages (NLs) We conclude by analyzing the multilingual code generation capabilities of state-of-the-art (SOTA) Code LLMs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-19T08:44:26Z)
• Bridging the Language Gaps in Large Language Models with Inference-Time Cross-Lingual Intervention [71.12193680015622]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) have shown remarkable capabilities in natural language processing. LLMs exhibit significant performance gaps among different languages. We propose Inference-Time Cross-Lingual Intervention (INCLINE) to overcome these limitations without incurring significant costs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-16T11:23:03Z)
• Disce aut Deficere: Evaluating LLMs Proficiency on the INVALSI Italian Benchmark [12.729687989535359]
  evaluating Large Language Models (LLMs) in languages other than English is crucial for ensuring their linguistic versatility, cultural relevance, and applicability in diverse global contexts. We tackle this challenge by introducing a structured benchmark using the INVALSI tests, a set of well-established assessments designed to measure educational competencies across Italy.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-25T13:20:08Z)
• Quantifying Contamination in Evaluating Code Generation Capabilities of Language Models [27.24738197172374]
  Large language models have achieved remarkable performance on various code generation benchmarks. There have been growing concerns regarding potential contamination of these benchmarks as they may be leaked into pretraining and finetuning data. We show that there are substantial overlap between popular code generation benchmarks and open training corpus, and models perform significantly better on the subset of the benchmarks where similar solutions are seen during training.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-03-06T21:45:35Z)
• Analyzing and Adapting Large Language Models for Few-Shot Multilingual NLU: Are We There Yet? [82.02076369811402]
  Supervised fine-tuning (SFT), supervised instruction tuning (SIT) and in-context learning (ICL) are three alternative, de facto standard approaches to few-shot learning. We present an extensive and systematic comparison of the three approaches, testing them on 6 high- and low-resource languages, three different NLU tasks, and a myriad of language and domain setups. Our observations show that supervised instruction tuning has the best trade-off between performance and resource requirements.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-03-04T10:48:13Z)
• FollowEval: A Multi-Dimensional Benchmark for Assessing the Instruction-Following Capability of Large Language Models [42.72420855478716]
  FollowEval benchmark is composed of instances in both English and Chinese. Each test example is designed to evaluate more than one dimension. We have evaluated various LLMs using the FollowEval benchmark and found that their performance significantly lags behind that of humans.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-16T11:53:31Z)
• Evaluating the Performance of Large Language Models on GAOKAO Benchmark [53.663757126289795]
  This paper introduces GAOKAO-Bench, an intuitive benchmark that employs questions from the Chinese GAOKAO examination as test samples. With human evaluation, we obtain the converted total score of LLMs, including GPT-4, ChatGPT and ERNIE-Bot. We also use LLMs to grade the subjective questions, and find that model scores achieve a moderate level of consistency with human scores.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-21T14:39:28Z)
• The Benchmark Lottery [114.43978017484893]
  "A benchmark lottery" describes the overall fragility of the machine learning benchmarking process. We show that the relative performance of algorithms may be altered significantly simply by choosing different benchmark tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-07-14T21:08:30Z)
• XTREME: A Massively Multilingual Multi-task Benchmark for Evaluating Cross-lingual Generalization [128.37244072182506]
  Cross-lingual TRansfer Evaluation of Multilinguals XTREME is a benchmark for evaluating the cross-lingual generalization capabilities of multilingual representations across 40 languages and 9 tasks. We demonstrate that while models tested on English reach human performance on many tasks, there is still a sizable gap in the performance of cross-lingually transferred models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-03-24T19:09:37Z)

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.