Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

PromptSet: A Programmer's Prompting Dataset

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 2402.16932 v1 pith:EX4QTO4S submitted 2024-02-26 cs.SE

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

The rise of capabilities expressed by large language models has been quickly followed by the integration of the same complex systems into application level logic. Algorithms, programs, systems, and companies are built around structured prompting to black box models where the majority of the design and implementation lies in capturing and quantifying the `agent mode'. The standard way to shape a closed language model is to prime it for a specific task with a tailored prompt, often initially handwritten by a human. The textual prompts co-evolve with the codebase, taking shape over the course of project life as artifacts which must be reviewed and maintained, just as the traditional code files might be. Unlike traditional code, we find that prompts do not receive effective static testing and linting to prevent runtime issues. In this work, we present a novel dataset called PromptSet, with more than 61,000 unique developer prompts used in open source Python programs. We perform analysis on this dataset and introduce the notion of a static linter for prompts. Released with this publication is a HuggingFace dataset and a Github repository to recreate collection and processing efforts, both under the name \texttt{pisterlabs/promptset}.

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. An Empirically-grounded tool for Automatic Prompt Linting and Repair: A Case Study on Bias, Vulnerability, and Optimization in Developer Prompts

    cs.SE 2025-01 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    An automated linting and repair tool finds 3.46% of developer prompts biased, 10.75% injection-vulnerable, and improves a fraction of suboptimal prompts.

Pith tools