Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

Augmenting the Interpretability of GraphCodeBERT for Code Similarity Tasks

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 2410.05275 v1 pith:KBMPRRZJ submitted 2024-09-20 cs.IR

Augmenting the Interpretability of GraphCodeBERT for Code Similarity Tasks

classification cs.IR
keywords codefragmentssimilarityapproachgraphcodebertidentificationimproveinterpretability
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved
0 comments
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN
read the original abstract

Assessing the degree of similarity of code fragments is crucial for ensuring software quality, but it remains challenging due to the need to capture the deeper semantic aspects of code. Traditional syntactic methods often fail to identify these connections. Recent advancements have addressed this challenge, though they frequently sacrifice interpretability. To improve this, we present an approach aiming to improve the transparency of the similarity assessment by using GraphCodeBERT, which enables the identification of semantic relationships between code fragments. This approach identifies similar code fragments and clarifies the reasons behind that identification, helping developers better understand and trust the results. The source code for our implementation is available at https://www.github.com/jorge-martinez-gil/graphcodebert-interpretability.

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

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

  1. How Small Transformation Expose the Weakness of Semantic Similarity Measures

    cs.CL 2025-09 reject novelty 4.0

    A diagnostic benchmark of text and code transformations finds embedding similarity metrics often conflate opposition with equivalence; LLM judges discriminate better, and Euclidean distance improves code embeddings.