EDIT-Bench: Evaluating LLM Abilities to Perform Real-World Instructed Code Edits

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2511.04486v1
• Date: Thu, 06 Nov 2025 16:05:28 GMT
• Title: EDIT-Bench: Evaluating LLM Abilities to Perform Real-World Instructed Code Edits
• Authors: Wayne Chi, Valerie Chen, Ryan Shar, Aditya Mittal, Jenny Liang, Wei-Lin Chiang, Anastasios Nikolas Angelopoulos, Ion Stoica, Graham Neubig, Ameet Talwalkar, Chris Donahue,
• Abstract summary: We introduce EDIT-Bench, a benchmark for evaluatingstructed code editing capabilities grounded in real-world usage.<n>EDIT-Bench comprises of 545 problems, multiple natural and programming languages, and a diverse set of real-world use cases.<n>We find that model performance varies across different categories of user instructions.
• Score: 72.23150343093447
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Instructed code editing, where LLMs directly modify a developer's existing code based on a user instruction, is becoming a widely used interaction mode in AI coding assistants. However, few benchmarks directly evaluate this capability and current datasets often rely on artificial sources. We introduce EDIT-Bench, a benchmark for evaluating LLM code editing capabilities grounded in real-world usage, i.e., user instructions and code contexts collected in the wild. EDIT-Bench comprises of 545 problems, multiple natural and programming languages, and a diverse set of real-world use cases, ranging from resolving errors to adding features. EDIT-Bench introduces context-dependent problems that require the model to understand code context, highlighted code, and cursor position in addition to the user instruction. We evaluate 40 diverse LLMs and observe that EDIT-Bench is a challenging set of problems where only 5 models score over 60%. We find that model performance varies across different categories of user instructions. Further, we find that varying levels of contextual information greatly affect task success rate, with performance varying up to 11%, indicating the importance of evaluating with realistic context.

Related papers

• Operational Robustness of LLMs on Code Generation [2.9232837969697965]
  It is now common practice in software development for large language models (LLMs) to be used to generate program code.<n>This paper is concerned in particular with how sensitive LLMs are to variations in descriptions of the coding tasks.<n>Existing techniques for evaluating this robustness are unsuitable for code generation because the input data space of natural language descriptions is discrete.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-21T11:21:13Z)
• Wired for Reuse: Automating Context-Aware Code Adaptation in IDEs via LLM-Based Agent [7.631972490231939]
  We introduce WIRL, an agent for code wiring framed as a Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) infilling task.<n>We evaluate WIRL on a carefully curated, high-quality dataset consisting of real-world code adaptation scenarios.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-07-02T03:00:23Z)
• ComprehendEdit: A Comprehensive Dataset and Evaluation Framework for Multimodal Knowledge Editing [27.034072044001736]
  Large multimodal language models (MLLMs) have revolutionized natural language processing and visual understanding.<n>Current knowledge editing evaluations are limited in scope and potentially biased.<n>We introduce ComprehendEdit, a comprehensive benchmark comprising eight diverse tasks from multiple datasets.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-12-17T11:41:49Z)
• A Real-World Benchmark for Evaluating Fine-Grained Issue Solving Capabilities of Large Language Models [11.087034068992653]
  FAUN-Eval is a benchmark specifically designed to evaluate the Fine-grAined issUe solviNg capabilities of LLMs.<n>It is constructed using a dataset curated from 30 well-known GitHub repositories.<n>We evaluate ten LLMs with FAUN-Eval, including four closed-source and six open-source models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-11-27T03:25:44Z)
• CIBench: Evaluating Your LLMs with a Code Interpreter Plugin [68.95137938214862]
  We propose an interactive evaluation framework, named CIBench, to comprehensively assess LLMs' ability to utilize code interpreters for data science tasks. The evaluation dataset is constructed using an LLM-human cooperative approach and simulates an authentic workflow by leveraging consecutive and interactive IPython sessions. We conduct extensive experiments to analyze the ability of 24 LLMs on CIBench and provide valuable insights for future LLMs in code interpreter utilization.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-15T07:43:55Z)
• BigCodeBench: Benchmarking Code Generation with Diverse Function Calls and Complex Instructions [72.56339136017759]
  We introduce BigCodeBench, a benchmark that challenges Large Language Models (LLMs) to invoke multiple function calls as tools from 139 libraries and 7 domains for 1,140 fine-grained tasks.<n>Our evaluation shows that LLMs are not yet capable of following complex instructions to use function calls precisely, with scores up to 60%, significantly lower than the human performance of 97%.<n>We propose a natural-language-oriented variant of BigCodeBench, BigCodeBench-Instruct, that automatically transforms the original docstrings into short instructions only with essential information.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-22T15:52:04Z)
• CodeEditorBench: Evaluating Code Editing Capability of Large Language Models [49.387195629660994]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) for code are rapidly evolving, with code editing emerging as a critical capability.<n>We introduce CodeEditorBench, an evaluation framework designed to rigorously assess the performance of LLMs in code editing tasks.<n>We curate diverse coding challenges and scenarios from five sources, covering various programming languages, complexity levels, and editing tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-04-04T15:49:49Z)
• ML-Bench: Evaluating Large Language Models and Agents for Machine Learning Tasks on Repository-Level Code [76.84199699772903]
  ML-Bench is a benchmark rooted in real-world programming applications that leverage existing code repositories to perform tasks. To evaluate both Large Language Models (LLMs) and AI agents, two setups are employed: ML-LLM-Bench for assessing LLMs' text-to-code conversion within a predefined deployment environment, and ML-Agent-Bench for testing autonomous agents in an end-to-end task execution within a Linux sandbox environment.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-16T12:03:21Z)
• Editing Large Language Models: Problems, Methods, and Opportunities [51.903537096207]
  This paper embarks on a deep exploration of the problems, methods, and opportunities related to model editing for LLMs. We provide an exhaustive overview of the task definition and challenges associated with model editing, along with an in-depth empirical analysis of the most progressive methods currently at our disposal. Our objective is to provide valuable insights into the effectiveness and feasibility of each editing technique, thereby assisting the community in making informed decisions on the selection of the most appropriate method for a specific task or context.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-22T16:00:00Z)

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.