Designing Empirical Studies on LLM-Based Code Generation: Towards a Reference Framework

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2510.03862v1
• Date: Sat, 04 Oct 2025 16:15:54 GMT
• Title: Designing Empirical Studies on LLM-Based Code Generation: Towards a Reference Framework
• Authors: Nathalia Nascimento, Everton Guimaraes, Paulo Alencar,
• Abstract summary: We propose a theoretical framework for designing and reporting empirical studies on large language models (LLMs)-based code generation.<n>The framework is grounded in both our prior experience conducting such experiments and a comparative analysis of key similarities and differences among recent studies.<n>It organizes evaluation around core components such as problem sources, quality attributes, and metrics, supporting structured and systematic experimentation.
• Score: 0.3568466510804538
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: The rise of large language models (LLMs) has introduced transformative potential in automated code generation, addressing a wide range of software engineering challenges. However, empirical evaluation of LLM-based code generation lacks standardization, with studies varying widely in goals, tasks, and metrics, which limits comparability and reproducibility. In this paper, we propose a theoretical framework for designing and reporting empirical studies on LLM-based code generation. The framework is grounded in both our prior experience conducting such experiments and a comparative analysis of key similarities and differences among recent studies. It organizes evaluation around core components such as problem sources, quality attributes, and metrics, supporting structured and systematic experimentation. We demonstrate its applicability through representative case mappings and identify opportunities for refinement. Looking forward, we plan to evolve the framework into a more robust and mature tool for standardizing LLM evaluation across software engineering contexts.

Related papers

• From Code Foundation Models to Agents and Applications: A Practical Guide to Code Intelligence [150.3696990310269]
  Large language models (LLMs) have transformed automated software development by enabling direct translation of natural language descriptions into functional code.<n>We provide a comprehensive synthesis and practical guide (a series of analytic and probing experiments) about code LLMs.<n>We analyze the code capability of the general LLMs (GPT-4, Claude, LLaMA) and code-specialized LLMs (StarCoder, Code LLaMA, DeepSeek-Coder, and QwenCoder)
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-11-23T17:09:34Z)
• Benchmarking and Studying the LLM-based Agent System in End-to-End Software Development [33.01897134024342]
  Development of LLM-based autonomous agents for end-to-end software development represents a significant paradigm shift in software engineering.<n>This work provides the community with a more realistic benchmark, a comprehensive evaluation framework, and crucial insights into the current capabilities and core challenges of software development agents.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-11-06T05:10:04Z)
• A Survey of Vibe Coding with Large Language Models [93.88284590533242]
  "Vibe Coding" is a development methodology where developers validate AI-generated implementations through outcome observation.<n>Despite its transformative potential, the effectiveness of this emergent paradigm remains under-explored.<n>This survey provides the first comprehensive and systematic review of Vibe Coding with large language models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-10-14T11:26:56Z)
• ELMES: An Automated Framework for Evaluating Large Language Models in Educational Scenarios [23.549720214649476]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) present transformative opportunities for education, generating numerous novel application scenarios.<n>Current benchmarks predominantly measure general intelligence rather than pedagogical capabilities.<n>We introduce ELMES, an open-source automated evaluation framework specifically designed for assessing LLMs in educational settings.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-07-27T15:20:19Z)
• Discrete Tokenization for Multimodal LLMs: A Comprehensive Survey [69.45421620616486]
  This work presents the first structured taxonomy and analysis of discrete tokenization methods designed for large language models (LLMs)<n>We categorize 8 representative VQ variants that span classical and modern paradigms and analyze their algorithmic principles, training dynamics, and integration challenges with LLM pipelines.<n>We identify key challenges including codebook collapse, unstable gradient estimation, and modality-specific encoding constraints.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-07-21T10:52:14Z)
• MERA Code: A Unified Framework for Evaluating Code Generation Across Tasks [56.34018316319873]
  We propose MERA Code, a benchmark for evaluating code for the latest code generation LLMs in Russian.<n>This benchmark includes 11 evaluation tasks that span 8 programming languages.<n>We evaluate open LLMs and frontier API models, analyzing their limitations in terms of practical coding tasks in non-English languages.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-07-16T14:31:33Z)
• OpenUnlearning: Accelerating LLM Unlearning via Unified Benchmarking of Methods and Metrics [101.78963920333342]
  We introduce OpenUnlearning, a standardized framework for benchmarking large language models (LLMs) unlearning methods and metrics.<n>OpenUnlearning integrates 9 unlearning algorithms and 16 diverse evaluations across 3 leading benchmarks.<n>We also benchmark diverse unlearning methods and provide a comparative analysis against an extensive evaluation suite.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-06-14T20:16:37Z)
• Aligning MLLM Benchmark With Human Preferences via Structural Equation Modeling [17.092510377905814]
  evaluating multimodal large language models (MLLMs) remains a fundamental challenge due to a lack of structured, interpretable, and theoretically grounded benchmark designs.<n>We propose a novel framework for aligning MLLM benchmark based on Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) to analyze and quantify the internal validity, dimensional separability, and contribution of benchmark components.<n> Experimental results demonstrate that the proposed benchmark exhibits stronger interpretability, reduced indicator redundancy, and clearer cognitive consistency compared to existing approaches.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-06-13T08:04:56Z)
• BinMetric: A Comprehensive Binary Analysis Benchmark for Large Language Models [50.17907898478795]
  We introduce BinMetric, a benchmark designed to evaluate the performance of large language models on binary analysis tasks.<n>BinMetric comprises 1,000 questions derived from 20 real-world open-source projects across 6 practical binary analysis tasks.<n>Our empirical study on this benchmark investigates the binary analysis capabilities of various state-of-the-art LLMs, revealing their strengths and limitations in this field.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-12T08:54:07Z)
• Model Utility Law: Evaluating LLMs beyond Performance through Mechanism Interpretable Metric [99.56567010306807]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) have become indispensable across academia, industry, and daily applications.<n>One core challenge of evaluation in the large language model (LLM) era is the generalization issue.<n>We propose Model Utilization Index (MUI), a mechanism interpretability enhanced metric that complements traditional performance scores.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-04-10T04:09:47Z)
• Large Language Models for Code Generation: The Practitioners Perspective [4.946128083535776]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) have emerged as coding assistants, capable of generating source code from natural language prompts.<n>We propose and develop a multi-model unified platform to generate and execute code based on natural language prompts.<n>We conducted a survey with 60 software practitioners from 11 countries across four continents to evaluate the usability, performance, strengths, and limitations of each model.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-01-28T14:52:16Z)
• IdeaBench: Benchmarking Large Language Models for Research Idea Generation [19.66218274796796]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) have transformed how people interact with artificial intelligence (AI) systems. We propose IdeaBench, a benchmark system that includes a comprehensive dataset and an evaluation framework. Our dataset comprises titles and abstracts from a diverse range of influential papers, along with their referenced works. Our evaluation framework is a two-stage process: first, using GPT-4o to rank ideas based on user-specified quality indicators such as novelty and feasibility, enabling scalable personalization.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-31T17:04:59Z)
• What's Wrong with Your Code Generated by Large Language Models? An Extensive Study [92.62952504133926]
  This study evaluated the performance of three leading closed-source LLMs and six popular open-source LLMs on three commonly used benchmarks.<n>We developed a taxonomy of bugs for incorrect codes and analyzed the root cause for common bug types.<n>We propose a novel training-free iterative method that introduces self-critique, enabling LLMs to critique and correct their generated code.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-08T17:27:17Z)
• HumanEvo: An Evolution-aware Benchmark for More Realistic Evaluation of Repository-level Code Generation [36.1669124651617]
  We conduct an empirical study to understand Large Language Models' code generation performance within settings that reflect the evolution nature of software development.<n>We use an evolution-aware repository-level code generation dataset, namely HumanEvo, equipped with an automated execution-based evaluation tool.<n>We find that previous evolution-ignored evaluation methods result in inflated performance of LLMs, with performance overestimations ranging from 10.0% to 61.1%.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-11T03:19:18Z)
• Generative transformations and patterns in LLM-native approaches for software verification and falsification [1.4595796095047369]
  We argue that a foundational step towards a more disciplined engineering practice is a systematic understanding of the core functional units-generative transformations.<n>We first present a fine-grained taxonomy of generative transformations, abstracting prompt-based interactions into conceptual signatures.<n>Our analysis not only validates the utility of the taxonomy but also surfaces strategic gaps and cross-dimensional relationships.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-04-14T23:45:23Z)

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.