Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 cited by

CRUXEval-X: A Benchmark for Multilingual Code Reasoning, Understanding and Execution

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 2408.13001 v2 pith:3RMZBBWN submitted 2024-08-23 cs.AI

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

Code benchmarks such as HumanEval are widely adopted to evaluate Large Language Models' (LLMs) coding capabilities. However, there is an unignorable programming language bias in existing code benchmarks -- over 95% code generation benchmarks are dominated by Python, leaving the LLMs' capabilities in other programming languages such as Java and C/C++ unknown. Moreover, coding task bias is also crucial. Most benchmarks focus on code generation capability, while benchmarks for code reasoning (given input, reasoning output; and given output, reasoning input), an essential coding capability, are insufficient. Yet, constructing multi-lingual benchmarks can be expensive and labor-intensive, and codes in contest websites such as Leetcode suffer from data contamination during training. To fill this gap, we propose CRUXEVAL-X, a multi-lingual code reasoning benchmark that contains 19 programming languages. It comprises at least 600 subjects for each language, along with 19K content-consistent tests in total. In particular, the construction pipeline of CRUXEVAL-X works in a fully automated and test-guided manner, which iteratively generates and repairs based on execution feedback. Also, to cross language barriers (e.g., dynamic/static type systems in Python/C++), we formulated various transition rules between language pairs to facilitate translation. Our intensive evaluation of 24 representative LLMs reveals the correlation between language pairs. For example, TypeScript and JavaScript show a significant positive correlation, while Racket has less correlation with other languages. More interestingly, even a model trained solely on Python can achieve at most 34.4% Pass@1 in other languages, revealing the cross-language generalization of LLMs.

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 4 Pith papers

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

  1. MirrorCode: AI can rebuild entire programs from behavior alone

    cs.AI 2026-06 unverdicted novelty 7.0 of 10

    MirrorCode benchmark shows current AI models achieving up to 56% success reimplementing 25 diverse full programs from behavior alone, including a 16,000-line bioinformatics toolkit.

  2. CrossPL: Evaluating Large Language Models on Cross Programming Language Code Generation

    cs.SE 2025-07 conditional novelty 7.0 of 10

    CrossPL, a 1,982-task benchmark built from GitHub repositories, shows that LLMs achieve at most 79.74% pass@1 on cross-language IPC code generation and struggle with low-level protocols like Pipe.

  3. CodeReasoner: Enhancing the Code Reasoning Ability with Reinforcement Learning

    cs.SE 2025-07 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    CodeReasoner combines a concise execution-focused dataset, instruction tuning, and GRPO RL to make 7B/14B models match or beat GPT-4o on code reasoning benchmarks.

  4. Context-Aware CodeLLM Eviction for AI-assisted Coding

    cs.SE 2025-06 reject novelty 5.0 of 10

    CACE, a context-aware eviction policy, cuts code-model reloads and response latency in self-hosted AI-assistant serving compared with LRU, though its future-demand factor reads the actual test workload.

Pith tools