REVIEW 1 cited by
LLM4VV: Exploring LLM-as-a-Judge for Validation and Verification Testsuites
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
read the original abstract
Large Language Models (LLM) are evolving and have significantly revolutionized the landscape of software development. If used well, they can significantly accelerate the software development cycle. At the same time, the community is very cautious of the models being trained on biased or sensitive data, which can lead to biased outputs along with the inadvertent release of confidential information. Additionally, the carbon footprints and the un-explainability of these black box models continue to raise questions about the usability of LLMs. With the abundance of opportunities LLMs have to offer, this paper explores the idea of judging tests used to evaluate compiler implementations of directive-based programming models as well as probe into the black box of LLMs. Based on our results, utilizing an agent-based prompting approach and setting up a validation pipeline structure drastically increased the quality of DeepSeek Coder, the LLM chosen for the evaluation purposes.
Forward citations
Cited by 1 Pith paper
-
Overcoming Vision Language Model Challenges in Diagram Understanding: A Proof-of-Concept with XML-Driven Large Language Models Solutions
A proof-of-concept showing that parsing diagram metadata from Office XML files into text lets LLMs answer diagram questions more reliably than feeding the rendered image to a VLM.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.