REVIEW
ACE-RLHF: Automated Code Evaluation and Socratic Feedback Generation Tool using Large Language Models and Reinforcement Learning with Human Feedback
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
Signed reviews
read the original abstract
Automated Program Repair tools are developed for generating feedback and suggesting a repair method for erroneous code. State of the art (SOTA) code repair methods rely on data-driven approaches and often fail to deliver solution for complicated programming questions. To interpret the natural language of unprecedented programming problems, using Large Language Models (LLMs) for code-feedback generation is crucial. LLMs generate more comprehensible feedback than compiler-generated error messages, and Reinforcement Learning with Human Feedback (RLHF) further enhances quality by integrating human-in-the-loop which helps novice students to lean programming from scratch interactively. We are applying RLHF fine-tuning technique for an expected Socratic response such as a question with hint to solve the programming issue. We are proposing code feedback generation tool by fine-tuning LLM with RLHF, Automated Code Evaluation with RLHF (ACE-RLHF), combining two open-source LLM models with two different SOTA optimization techniques. The quality of feedback is evaluated on two benchmark datasets containing basic and competition-level programming questions where the later is proposed by us. We achieved 2-5% higher accuracy than RL-free SOTA techniques using Llama-3-7B-Proximal-policy optimization in automated evaluation and similar or slightly higher accuracy compared to reward model-free RL with AI Feedback (RLAIF). We achieved almost 40% higher accuracy with GPT-3.5 Best-of-n optimization while performing manual evaluation.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.