Think Like Human Developers: Harnessing Community Knowledge for Structured Code Reasoning

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2503.14838v1
• Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2025 02:45:13 GMT
• Title: Think Like Human Developers: Harnessing Community Knowledge for Structured Code Reasoning
• Authors: Chengran Yang, Zhensu Sun, Hong Jin Kang, Jieke Shi, David Lo,
• Abstract summary: Large Language Models (LLMs) have significantly advanced automated code generation, yet they struggle with complex coding tasks requiring logical reasoning.<n>Existing approaches either rely on computationally expensive reinforcement learning (RL) or error-prone reasoning chains synthesized by LLMs.<n>We propose SVRC, a novel framework that mines, restructures, and enriches reasoning chains from community-driven discussions on software engineering platforms.
• Score: 10.727882609644578
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Large Language Models (LLMs) have significantly advanced automated code generation, yet they struggle with complex coding tasks requiring multi-step logical reasoning. High-quality reasoning data is crucial for improving LLMs' reasoning capabilities, but such datasets remain scarce. Existing approaches either rely on computationally expensive reinforcement learning (RL) or error-prone reasoning chains synthesized by LLMs, posing challenges in scalability and accuracy. To address this challenge, we propose SVRC (Structured and Validated Reasoning Chains for Code Generation), a novel framework that mines, restructures, and enriches reasoning chains from community-driven discussions on software engineering platforms. SVRC refines unstructured and incomplete discussions of coding problems by aligning them with Software Development Life Cycle (SDLC) principles, ensuring that reasoning chains capture real-world problem-solving strategies and support iterative refinement. To evaluate the effectiveness of SVRC, we introduce CodeThinker, an LLM fine-tuned on 12,444 reasoning-augmented samples generated by SVRC. Experiments on LiveCodeBench show that CodeThinker surpasses its base model by 42.86\% on medium-level code problems in terms of pass@1 and outperforms GPT-4o-mini and GPT-4o by 73.14\% and 115.86\%, respectively. Our ablation study further highlights that each component of SVRC contributes to the reasoning capabilities of CodeThinker.

Related papers

• CoT-RAG: Integrating Chain of Thought and Retrieval-Augmented Generation to Enhance Reasoning in Large Language Models [14.784841713647682]
  CoT-RAG is a novel reasoning framework with three key designs. It features Knowledge Graph-driven CoT Generation, Learnable Knowledge Case-aware RAG, and Pseudo-Program Prompting Execution. Compared with the-state-of-the-art methods, CoT-RAG exhibits a significant accuracy improvement, ranging from 4.0% to 23.0%.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-04-18T07:55:09Z)
• Code to Think, Think to Code: A Survey on Code-Enhanced Reasoning and Reasoning-Driven Code Intelligence in LLMs [53.00384299879513]
  In large language models (LLMs), code and reasoning reinforce each other.<n>Code provides verifiable execution paths, enforces logical decomposition, and enables runtime validation.<n>We identify key challenges and propose future research directions to strengthen this synergy.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-26T18:55:42Z)
• Bridging LLM-Generated Code and Requirements: Reverse Generation technique and SBC Metric for Developer Insights [0.0]
  This paper introduces a novel scoring mechanism called the SBC score.<n>It is based on a reverse generation technique that leverages the natural language generation capabilities of Large Language Models.<n>Unlike direct code analysis, our approach reconstructs system requirements from AI-generated code and compares them with the original specifications.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-11T01:12:11Z)
• Large Language Models Meet Symbolic Provers for Logical Reasoning Evaluation [24.081573908824353]
  First-order logic (FOL) reasoning is pivotal for intelligent systems.<n>Existing benchmarks often rely on extensive human annotation or handcrafted templates.<n>We propose a novel framework called ProverGen that synergizes the generative strengths of Large Language Models with the rigor and precision of symbolic provers.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-10T15:31:54Z)
• Guided Code Generation with LLMs: A Multi-Agent Framework for Complex Code Tasks [1.9198713957364215]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) have shown remarkable capabilities in code generation tasks.<n>They face significant limitations in handling complex, long-context programming challenges.<n>This paper introduces a novel agentic framework for guided code generation''
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-01-11T19:21:53Z)
• Improving LLM Reasoning through Scaling Inference Computation with Collaborative Verification [52.095460362197336]
  Large language models (LLMs) struggle with consistent and accurate reasoning. LLMs are trained primarily on correct solutions, reducing their ability to detect and learn from errors. We propose a novel collaborative method integrating Chain-of-Thought (CoT) and Program-of-Thought (PoT) solutions for verification.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-05T05:21:48Z)
• Can We Further Elicit Reasoning in LLMs? Critic-Guided Planning with Retrieval-Augmentation for Solving Challenging Tasks [68.49251303172674]
  State-of-the-art large language models (LLMs) exhibit impressive problem-solving capabilities but may struggle with complex reasoning and factual correctness. Existing methods harness the strengths of chain-of-thought and retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) to decompose a complex problem into simpler steps and apply retrieval to improve factual correctness. We introduce Critic-guided planning with Retrieval-augmentation, CR-Planner, a novel framework that leverages fine-tuned critic models to guide both reasoning and retrieval processes through planning.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-02T11:26:02Z)
• Unlocking Reasoning Potential in Large Langauge Models by Scaling Code-form Planning [94.76546523689113]
  We introduce CodePlan, a framework that generates and follows textcode-form plans -- pseudocode that outlines high-level, structured reasoning processes. CodePlan effectively captures the rich semantics and control flows inherent to sophisticated reasoning tasks. It achieves a 25.1% relative improvement compared with directly generating responses.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-09-19T04:13:58Z)
• 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)
• Multi-step Inference over Unstructured Data [2.169874047093392]
  High-stakes decision-making tasks in fields such as medical, legal and finance require a level of precision, comprehensiveness, and logical consistency. We have developed a neuro-symbolic AI platform to tackle these problems. The platform integrates fine-tuned LLMs for knowledge extraction and alignment with a robust symbolic reasoning engine.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-26T00:00:45Z)
• When Do Program-of-Thoughts Work for Reasoning? [51.2699797837818]
  We propose complexity-impacted reasoning score (CIRS) to measure correlation between code and reasoning abilities. Specifically, we use the abstract syntax tree to encode the structural information and calculate logical complexity. Code will be integrated into the EasyInstruct framework at https://github.com/zjunlp/EasyInstruct.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-08-29T17:22:39Z)

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.