Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 cited by

A Critical Study of What Code-LLMs (Do Not) Learn

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 2406.11930 v1 pith:WAQ4UR5Z submitted 2024-06-17 cs.SE cs.AIcs.CL

classification cs.SEcs.AIcs.CL
keywords code-llmsencodetokensmodelsrelationssyntacticcodeidentifiers
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 trained on code corpora (code-LLMs) have demonstrated impressive performance in various coding assistance tasks. However, despite their increased size and training dataset, code-LLMs still have limitations such as suggesting codes with syntactic errors, variable misuse etc. Some studies argue that code-LLMs perform well on coding tasks because they use self-attention and hidden representations to encode relations among input tokens. However, previous works have not studied what code properties are not encoded by code-LLMs. In this paper, we conduct a fine-grained analysis of attention maps and hidden representations of code-LLMs. Our study indicates that code-LLMs only encode relations among specific subsets of input tokens. Specifically, by categorizing input tokens into syntactic tokens and identifiers, we found that models encode relations among syntactic tokens and among identifiers, but they fail to encode relations between syntactic tokens and identifiers. We also found that fine-tuned models encode these relations poorly compared to their pre-trained counterparts. Additionally, larger models with billions of parameters encode significantly less information about code than models with only a few hundred million parameters.

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. Full citation record

  1. ATLAS: Multi-View Code Representation Tool for C and C++ Source Programs

    cs.SE 2025-12 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    ATLAS claims no-build aligned AST/CFG/DFG extraction for C/C++ at 96.8%/91.7% CFG correctness, and a 34.7-point LLM line-coverage lift when fed its CFG paths.

  2. LAMeD: LLM-generated Annotations for Memory Leak Detection

    cs.SE 2025-05 conditional novelty 4.0 of 10

    LLM-generated function annotations for C/C++ memory management improved CodeQL and Cooddy memory leak detection from 5 to 10 known bugs across 43 targets, at the cost of a large increase in warnings.

Pith tools