A new six-language benchmark for code efficiency shows that LLMs produce correct but measurably slower code than expert baselines, with the best model at about 62 percent of human runtime efficiency.
FixEval: Execution-based Evaluation of Program Fixes for Programming Problems
1 Pith paper cite this work. Polarity classification is still indexing.
abstract
The complexity of modern software has led to a drastic increase in the time and cost associated with detecting and rectifying software bugs. In response, researchers have explored various methods to automatically generate fixes for buggy code. However, due to the large combinatorial space of possible fixes for any given bug, few tools and datasets are available to evaluate model-generated fixes effectively. To address this issue, we introduce FixEval, a benchmark comprising of buggy code submissions to competitive programming problems and their corresponding fixes. FixEval offers an extensive collection of unit tests to evaluate the correctness of model-generated program fixes and assess further information regarding time, memory constraints, and acceptance based on a verdict. We consider two Transformer language models pretrained on programming languages as our baseline and compare them using match-based and execution-based evaluation metrics. Our experiments show that match-based metrics do not reflect model-generated program fixes accurately. At the same time, execution-based methods evaluate programs through all cases and scenarios designed explicitly for that solution. Therefore, we believe FixEval provides a step towards real-world automatic bug fixing and model-generated code evaluation. The dataset and models are open-sourced at https://github.com/mahimanzum/FixEval.
citation-role summary
citation-polarity summary
fields
cs.CL 1years
2025 1verdicts
CONDITIONAL 1roles
background 1polarities
unclear 1representative citing papers
citing papers explorer
-
EffiBench-X: A Multi-Language Benchmark for Measuring Efficiency of LLM-Generated Code
A new six-language benchmark for code efficiency shows that LLMs produce correct but measurably slower code than expert baselines, with the best model at about 62 percent of human runtime efficiency.