Enhancing Code Generation via Bidirectional Comment-Level Mutual Grounding
- URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2505.07768v1
- Date: Mon, 12 May 2025 17:20:30 GMT
- Title: Enhancing Code Generation via Bidirectional Comment-Level Mutual Grounding
- Authors: Yifeng Di, Tianyi Zhang,
- Abstract summary: Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated unprecedented capability in code generation.<n>Recent studies have shown that developers often struggle with inspecting and fixing incorrect code generated by LLMs.<n>Inspired by the mutual grounding theory in communication, we propose an interactive approach that leverages code comments as a medium for developers and LLMs to establish a shared understanding.
- Score: 6.867043179943195
- License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
- Abstract: Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated unprecedented capability in code generation. However, LLM-generated code is still plagued with a wide range of functional errors, especially for complex programming tasks that LLMs have not seen before. Recent studies have shown that developers often struggle with inspecting and fixing incorrect code generated by LLMs, diminishing their productivity and trust in LLM-based code generation. Inspired by the mutual grounding theory in communication, we propose an interactive approach that leverages code comments as a medium for developers and LLMs to establish a shared understanding. Our approach facilitates iterative grounding by interleaving code generation, inline comment generation, and contextualized user feedback through editable comments to align generated code with developer intent. We evaluated our approach on two popular benchmarks and demonstrated that our approach significantly improved multiple state-of-the-art LLMs, e.g., 17.1% pass@1 improvement for code-davinci-002 on HumanEval. Furthermore, we conducted a user study with 12 participants in comparison to two baselines: (1) interacting with GitHub Copilot, and (2) interacting with a multi-step code generation paradigm called Multi-Turn Program Synthesis. Participants completed the given programming tasks 16.7% faster and with 10.5% improvement in task success rate when using our approach. Both results show that interactively refining code comments enables the collaborative establishment of mutual grounding, leading to more accurate code generation and higher developer confidence.
Related papers
- IFEvalCode: Controlled Code Generation [69.28317223249358]
The paper introduces forward and backward constraints generation to improve the instruction-following capabilities of Code LLMs.<n>The authors present IFEvalCode, a multilingual benchmark comprising 1.6K test samples across seven programming languages.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-07-30T08:08:48Z) - Pragmatic Reasoning improves LLM Code Generation [35.78260347663757]
We propose CodeRSA, a novel code candidate reranking mechanism built upon the Rational Speech Act (RSA) framework.<n>We evaluate CodeRSA using one of the latest Large Language Models on a popular code generation dataset.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-02-20T12:44:26Z) - Crystal: Illuminating LLM Abilities on Language and Code [58.5467653736537]
We propose a pretraining strategy to enhance the integration of natural language and coding capabilities.
The resulting model, Crystal, demonstrates remarkable capabilities in both domains.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-11-06T10:28:46Z) - A Pair Programming Framework for Code Generation via Multi-Plan Exploration and Feedback-Driven Refinement [24.25119206488625]
PairCoder is a novel framework for large language models (LLMs) to generate code.
It incorporates two collaborative agents, namely a Navigator agent for high-level planning and a Driver agent for specific implementation.
The Driver follows the guidance of Navigator to undertake initial code generation, code testing, and refinement.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-09-08T07:22:19Z) - 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) - Uncovering LLM-Generated Code: A Zero-Shot Synthetic Code Detector via Code Rewriting [78.48355455324688]
We propose a novel zero-shot synthetic code detector based on the similarity between the original code and its LLM-rewritten variants.<n>Our results demonstrate a significant improvement over existing SOTA synthetic content detectors.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-05-25T08:57:28Z) - A Study on Developer Behaviors for Validating and Repairing LLM-Generated Code Using Eye Tracking and IDE Actions [13.58143103712]
GitHub Copilot is a large language model (LLM)-powered code generation tool.
This paper investigates how developers validate and repair code generated by Copilot.
Being aware of the code's provenance led to improved performance, increased search efforts, more frequent Copilot usage, and higher cognitive workload.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-05-25T06:20:01Z) - 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) - 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) - StepCoder: Improve Code Generation with Reinforcement Learning from
Compiler Feedback [58.20547418182074]
We introduce StepCoder, a novel framework for code generation, consisting of two main components.
CCCS addresses the exploration challenge by breaking the long sequences code generation task into a Curriculum of Code Completion Subtasks.
FGO only optimize the model by masking the unexecuted code segments to provide Fine-Grained Optimization.
Our method improves the ability to explore the output space and outperforms state-of-the-art approaches in corresponding benchmarks.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-02-02T13:14:31Z) - Fixing Large Language Models' Specification Misunderstanding for Better Code Generation [13.494822086550604]
muFiX is a novel prompting technique to improve the code generation performance of large language models (LLMs)<n>It first exploits test case analysis to obtain specification understanding and enables a self-improvement process.<n>muFiX further fixes the specification understanding towards the direction reducing the gap between the provided understanding and the actual understanding.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-09-28T02:58:07Z) - Large Language Models are Few-Shot Summarizers: Multi-Intent Comment
Generation via In-Context Learning [34.006227676170504]
This study investigates the feasibility of utilizing large language models (LLMs) to generate comments that can fulfill developers' diverse intents.
Experiments on two large-scale datasets demonstrate the rationale of our insights.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-04-22T12:26:24Z)
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.