REVIEW 8 cited by
Leveraging Automated Unit Tests for Unsupervised Code Translation
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
Leveraging Automated Unit Tests for Unsupervised Code Translation
read the original abstract
With little to no parallel data available for programming languages, unsupervised methods are well-suited to source code translation. However, the majority of unsupervised machine translation approaches rely on back-translation, a method developed in the context of natural language translation and one that inherently involves training on noisy inputs. Unfortunately, source code is highly sensitive to small changes; a single token can result in compilation failures or erroneous programs, unlike natural languages where small inaccuracies may not change the meaning of a sentence. To address this issue, we propose to leverage an automated unit-testing system to filter out invalid translations, thereby creating a fully tested parallel corpus. We found that fine-tuning an unsupervised model with this filtered data set significantly reduces the noise in the translations so-generated, comfortably outperforming the state-of-the-art for all language pairs studied. In particular, for Java $\to$ Python and Python $\to$ C++ we outperform the best previous methods by more than 16% and 24% respectively, reducing the error rate by more than 35%.
Forward citations
Cited by 8 Pith papers
-
ReCodeAgent: A Multi-Agent Workflow for Language-agnostic Translation and Validation of Large-scale Repositories
ReCodeAgent uses a multi-agent system to translate and validate large code repositories across multiple programming languages, achieving 60.8% higher test pass rates than prior neuro-symbolic and agentic methods on 11...
-
Is Your Code Generated by ChatGPT Really Correct? Rigorous Evaluation of Large Language Models for Code Generation
EvalPlus augments HumanEval with 80x more tests via LLM and mutation strategies, exposing up to 28.9% more incorrect LLM-generated code and reversing some model performance rankings.
-
CodeT: Code Generation with Generated Tests
CodeT improves code generation accuracy by using the same model to create test cases and then selecting solutions via output agreement on those tests, raising HumanEval pass@1 from 47% to 65.8%.
-
XSearch: Explainable Code Search via Concept-to-Code Alignment
XSearch achieves 15x gains on out-of-distribution code search benchmarks by replacing global embedding similarity with explicit concept-to-statement alignment.
-
XSearch: Explainable Code Search via Concept-to-Code Alignment
XSearch achieves explainable code search by breaking queries into functional concepts and matching them directly to code statements, delivering large gains on out-of-distribution benchmarks.
-
LLMs Corrupt Your Documents When You Delegate
LLMs corrupt an average of 25% of document content during long delegated editing workflows across 52 domains, even frontier models, and agentic tools do not mitigate the issue.
-
SWaRL: Safeguard Code Watermarking via Reinforcement Learning
SWaRL trains code LLMs with RL using compiler correctness signals and a confidential verifier reward to embed robust, functionality-preserving watermarks that resist refactoring attacks.
-
Boosting Automatic Java-to-Cangjie Translation with Multi-Stage LLM Training and Error Repair
Multi-stage LLM training plus compiler-guided error repair boosts functional equivalence in Java-to-Cangjie translation by 6.06% over prior methods despite scarce parallel data.
discussion (0)
Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.