Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 cited by

Towards Generating Functionally Correct Code Edits from Natural Language Issue Descriptions

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 2304.03816 v1 pith:ET5VG4GG submitted 2023-04-07 cs.SE cs.LG

classification cs.SEcs.LG
keywords codelanguagedescriptionsllmsnaturalcorrectfixesfunctionally
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

0 comments
read the original abstract

Large language models (LLMs), such as OpenAI's Codex, have demonstrated their potential to generate code from natural language descriptions across a wide range of programming tasks. Several benchmarks have recently emerged to evaluate the ability of LLMs to generate functionally correct code from natural language intent with respect to a set of hidden test cases. This has enabled the research community to identify significant and reproducible advancements in LLM capabilities. However, there is currently a lack of benchmark datasets for assessing the ability of LLMs to generate functionally correct code edits based on natural language descriptions of intended changes. This paper aims to address this gap by motivating the problem NL2Fix of translating natural language descriptions of code changes (namely bug fixes described in Issue reports in repositories) into correct code fixes. To this end, we introduce Defects4J-NL2Fix, a dataset of 283 Java programs from the popular Defects4J dataset augmented with high-level descriptions of bug fixes, and empirically evaluate the performance of several state-of-the-art LLMs for the this task. Results show that these LLMS together are capable of generating plausible fixes for 64.6% of the bugs, and the best LLM-based technique can achieve up to 21.20% top-1 and 35.68% top-5 accuracy on this benchmark.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 2 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. OpenAlex reports about 7 citations worldwide. Full citation record

  1. Trae Agent: An LLM-based Agent for Software Engineering with Test-time Scaling

    cs.SE 2025-07 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    Trae Agent combines parallel patch generation, hierarchical pruning, and agent-based majority-vote selection to reach 75.20% Pass@1 on SWE-bench Verified, the current leaderboard leader.

  2. DSBC : Data Science task Benchmarking with Context engineering

    cs.AI 2025-07 conditional novelty 4.0 of 10

    A new 303-question benchmark of realistic data science tasks finds that Claude-4-Sonnet with multi-step code generation outperforms other LLMs and agent styles, but the accuracy numbers rest on a thinly validated auto...

Pith tools