CodeGlance: Understanding Code Reasoning Challenges in LLMs through Multi-Dimensional Feature Analysis

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2602.13962v1
• Date: Sun, 15 Feb 2026 02:46:51 GMT
• Title: CodeGlance: Understanding Code Reasoning Challenges in LLMs through Multi-Dimensional Feature Analysis
• Authors: Yunkun Wang, Xuanhe Zhang, Junxiao Han, Chen Zhi, Shuiguang Deng,
• Abstract summary: We present CodeGlance, a benchmark investigating code reasoning challenges across three realistic scenarios.<n>We find that unseen function reasoning poses significant challenges especially for smaller models.<n>We identify critical code complexity features that significantly impact code reasoning difficulty across scenarios.
• Score: 14.328535883908176
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: In modern software development, developers frequently need to understand code behavior at a glance -- whether reviewing pull requests, debugging issues, or navigating unfamiliar codebases. This ability to reason about dynamic program behavior is fundamental to effective software engineering and increasingly supported by Large Language Models (LLMs). However, existing studies on code reasoning focus primarily on isolated code snippets, overlooking the complexity of real-world scenarios involving external API interactions and unfamiliar functions. This gap hinders our understanding of what truly makes code reasoning challenging for LLMs across diverse programming contexts. We present CodeGlance, a multi-dimensional benchmark investigating code reasoning challenges across three realistic scenarios: intrinsic logic reasoning, API interaction reasoning, and unseen function reasoning. Through systematic evaluation of 7 state-of-the-art LLMs, we reveal that unseen function reasoning poses significant challenges especially for smaller models, with Qwen2.5-3b achieving only 6.0\% accuracy on unseen functions compared to 37.5\% on familiar APIs. We identify critical code complexity features -- including execution trace length, API invocation count, and control flow complexity -- that significantly impact code reasoning difficulty across scenarios. We further investigate how common augmentation strategies, including CoT, document retrieval, and code search, can improve reasoning performance, finding that their effectiveness varies substantially depending on whether challenges stem from logical complexity or knowledge gaps. These findings provide actionable guidance for developing more capable code reasoning systems and deploying LLM-based programming assistants in real-world software development.

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)
• CoRe: Benchmarking LLMs Code Reasoning Capabilities through Static Analysis Tasks [14.408364047538578]
  Large language models (LLMs) have been widely adopted across diverse domains of software engineering.<n>This work presents CORE, a benchmark designed to evaluate LLMs on fundamental static analysis tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-07-03T01:35:58Z)
• Is Compression Really Linear with Code Intelligence? [60.123628177110206]
  textitFormat Annealing is a lightweight, transparent training methodology designed to assess the intrinsic capabilities of pre-trained models equitably.<n>Our empirical results reveal a fundamental logarithmic relationship between measured code intelligence and bits-per-character (BPC)<n>Our work provides a more nuanced understanding of compression's role in developing code intelligence and contributes a robust evaluation framework in the code domain.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-16T16:59:14Z)
• An Empirical Study on the Effectiveness of Large Language Models for Binary Code Understanding [50.17907898478795]
  This work proposes a benchmark to evaluate the effectiveness of Large Language Models (LLMs) in real-world reverse engineering scenarios.<n>Our evaluations reveal that existing LLMs can understand binary code to a certain extent, thereby improving the efficiency of binary code analysis.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-04-30T17:02:06Z)
• The Code Barrier: What LLMs Actually Understand? [7.407441962359689]
  This research uses code obfuscation as a structured testing framework to evaluate semantic understanding capabilities of language models.<n>Findings show a statistically significant performance decline as obfuscation complexity increases.<n>This research introduces a new evaluation approach for assessing code comprehension in language models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-04-14T14:11:26Z)
• 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)
• 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)
• PECC: Problem Extraction and Coding Challenges [3.287942619833188]
  We introduce PECC, a novel benchmark derived from Advent Of Code (AoC) challenges and Project Euler. Unlike conventional benchmarks, PECC requires LLMs to interpret narrative-embedded problems, extract requirements, and generate code. Results show varying model performance between narrative and neutral problems, with specific challenges in the Euler math-based subset.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-04-29T15:02:14Z)
• 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.