Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

Revisiting, Benchmarking and Exploring API Recommendation: How Far Are We?

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2112.12653 v1 pith:PZVUNIQK submitted 2021-12-23 cs.SE

classification cs.SE
keywords apisrecommendationtaskapproachessomeapibenchappropriatebeen
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

Application Programming Interfaces (APIs), which encapsulate the implementation of specific functions as interfaces, greatly improve the efficiency of modern software development. As numbers of APIs spring up nowadays, developers can hardly be familiar with all the APIs, and usually need to search for appropriate APIs for usage. So lots of efforts have been devoted to improving the API recommendation task. However, it has been increasingly difficult to gauge the performance of new models due to the lack of a uniform definition of the task and a standardized benchmark. For example, some studies regard the task as a code completion problem; while others recommend relative APIs given natural language queries. To reduce the challenges and better facilitate future research, in this paper, we revisit the API recommendation task and aim at benchmarking the approaches. Specifically, the paper groups the approaches into two categories according to the task definition, i.e., query-based API recommendation and code-based API recommendation. We study 11 recently-proposed approaches along with 4 widely-used IDEs. One benchmark named as APIBench is then built for the two respective categories of approaches. Based on APIBench, we distill some actionable insights and challenges for API recommendation. We also achieve some implications and directions for improving the performance of recommending APIs, including data source selection, appropriate query reformulation, low resource setting, and cross-domain adaptation.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Evolutionary Perspectives on the Evaluation of LLM-Based AI Agents: A Comprehensive Survey

    cs.CL 2025-06 conditional novelty 4.0 of 10

    A survey that classifies AI agent evaluation benchmarks along environment and capability axes, and proposes five traits that distinguish agents from chatbots.

Pith tools