Do Prompt Patterns Affect Code Quality? A First Empirical Assessment of ChatGPT-Generated Code

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2504.13656v1
• Date: Fri, 18 Apr 2025 12:37:02 GMT
• Title: Do Prompt Patterns Affect Code Quality? A First Empirical Assessment of ChatGPT-Generated Code
• Authors: Antonio Della Porta, Stefano Lambiase, Fabio Palomba,
• Abstract summary: This paper empirically investigates the impact of prompt patterns on code quality, specifically maintainability, security, and reliability, using the Dev-GPT dataset.<n>Results show that Zero-Shot prompting is most common, followed by Zero-Shot with Chain-of-Thought and Few-Shot.<n>Analysis of 7583 code files across quality metrics revealed minimal issues, with Kruskal-Wallis tests indicating no significant differences among patterns.
• Score: 9.39414414507972
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Large Language Models (LLMs) have rapidly transformed software development, especially in code generation. However, their inconsistent performance, prone to hallucinations and quality issues, complicates program comprehension and hinders maintainability. Research indicates that prompt engineering-the practice of designing inputs to direct LLMs toward generating relevant outputs-may help address these challenges. In this regard, researchers have introduced prompt patterns, structured templates intended to guide users in formulating their requests. However, the influence of prompt patterns on code quality has yet to be thoroughly investigated. An improved understanding of this relationship would be essential to advancing our collective knowledge on how to effectively use LLMs for code generation, thereby enhancing their understandability in contemporary software development. This paper empirically investigates the impact of prompt patterns on code quality, specifically maintainability, security, and reliability, using the Dev-GPT dataset. Results show that Zero-Shot prompting is most common, followed by Zero-Shot with Chain-of-Thought and Few-Shot. Analysis of 7583 code files across quality metrics revealed minimal issues, with Kruskal-Wallis tests indicating no significant differences among patterns, suggesting that prompt structure may not substantially impact these quality metrics in ChatGPT-assisted code generation.

Related papers

• CodeIF: Benchmarking the Instruction-Following Capabilities of Large Language Models for Code Generation [24.090719826360342]
  We introduce CodeIF, the first benchmark designed to assess the abilities of Large Language Models (LLMs) to adhere to task-oriented instructions within code generation scenarios.<n>We conduct extensive experiments with LLMs, analyzing their strengths and limitations in meeting the demands of these tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-26T14:19:49Z)
• The Impact of Prompt Programming on Function-Level Code Generation [3.072802875195726]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly used by software engineers for code generation.<n>We introduce CodePromptEval, a dataset of 7072 prompts designed to evaluate five prompt techniques.<n>Our findings show that while certain prompt techniques significantly influence the generated code, combining multiple techniques does not necessarily improve the outcome.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-12-29T18:34:10Z)
• Understanding Defects in Generated Codes by Language Models [0.669087470775851]
  This study categorizes and analyzes 367 identified defects from code snippets generated by Large Language Models. Error categories indicate key areas where LLMs frequently fail, underscoring the need for targeted improvements. This paper implemented five prompt engineering techniques, including Scratchpad Prompting, Program of Thoughts Prompting, Chain-of-Thought Prompting, Chain-of-Thought Prompting, and Structured Chain-of-Thought Prompting.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-08-23T21:10:09Z)
• 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)
• Validating LLM-Generated Programs with Metamorphic Prompt Testing [8.785973653167112]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly integrated into the software development lifecycle. This paper proposes a novel solution called metamorphic prompt testing to address these challenges. Our evaluation on HumanEval shows that metamorphic prompt testing is able to detect 75 percent of the erroneous programs generated by GPT-4, with a false positive rate of 8.6 percent.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-11T00:40:17Z)
• Comments as Natural Logic Pivots: Improve Code Generation via Comment Perspective [85.48043537327258]
  We propose MANGO (comMents As Natural loGic pivOts), including a comment contrastive training strategy and a corresponding logical comment decoding strategy. Results indicate that MANGO significantly improves the code pass rate based on the strong baselines. The robustness of the logical comment decoding strategy is notably higher than the Chain-of-thoughts prompting.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-04-11T08:30:46Z)
• CoCoST: Automatic Complex Code Generation with Online Searching and Correctness Testing [51.00909683314142]
  Large Language Models have revolutionized code generation ability by converting natural language descriptions into executable code. CoCoST framework enhances complex code generation by online searching for more information with planned queries and correctness testing for code refinement. CoCoST is validated through rigorous experiments on the DS-1000 and ClassEval datasets.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-03-20T13:33:55Z)
• Code Prompting Elicits Conditional Reasoning Abilities in Text+Code LLMs [65.2379940117181]
  We introduce code prompting, a chain of prompts that transforms a natural language problem into code. We find that code prompting exhibits a high-performance boost for multiple LLMs. Our analysis of GPT 3.5 reveals that the code formatting of the input problem is essential for performance improvement.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-01-18T15:32:24Z)
• Benchmarking and Explaining Large Language Model-based Code Generation: A Causality-Centric Approach [12.214585409361126]
  Large language models (LLMs)- based code generation is a complex and powerful black-box model. We propose a novel causal graph-based representation of the prompt and the generated code. We illustrate the insights that our framework can provide by studying over 3 popular LLMs with over 12 prompt adjustment strategies.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-10T14:56:26Z)
• CRITIC: Large Language Models Can Self-Correct with Tool-Interactive Critiquing [139.77117915309023]
  CRITIC allows large language models to validate and amend their own outputs in a manner similar to human interaction with tools. Comprehensive evaluations involving free-form question answering, mathematical program synthesis, and toxicity reduction demonstrate that CRITIC consistently enhances the performance of LLMs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-19T15:19:44Z)
• Python Code Generation by Asking Clarification Questions [57.63906360576212]
  In this work, we introduce a novel and more realistic setup for this task. We hypothesize that the under-specification of a natural language description can be resolved by asking clarification questions. We collect and introduce a new dataset named CodeClarQA containing pairs of natural language descriptions and code with created synthetic clarification questions and answers.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-12-19T22:08:36Z)
• CodeRL: Mastering Code Generation through Pretrained Models and Deep Reinforcement Learning [92.36705236706678]
  "CodeRL" is a new framework for program synthesis tasks through pretrained LMs and deep reinforcement learning. During inference, we introduce a new generation procedure with a critical sampling strategy. For the model backbones, we extended the encoder-decoder architecture of CodeT5 with enhanced learning objectives.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-07-05T02:42:15Z)

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.