Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 cited by

Can Large Language Models Understand Intermediate Representations in Compilers?

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 2502.06854 v2 pith:7Y5E5DDV submitted 2025-02-07 cs.LG cs.AIcs.CL

classification cs.LGcs.AIcs.CL
keywords reasoningcodellmscontrolcriticaldesignexecutionflow
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

Intermediate Representations (IRs) play a critical role in compiler design and program analysis, yet their comprehension by Large Language Models (LLMs) remains underexplored. In this paper, we present an explorative empirical study evaluating the capabilities of six state-of-the-art LLMs: GPT-4, GPT-3, DeepSeek, Gemma 2, Llama 3, and Code Llama, in understanding IRs. Specifically, we assess model performance across four core tasks: control flow graph reconstruction, decompilation, code summarization, and execution reasoning. While LLMs exhibit competence in parsing IR syntax and identifying high-level structures, they consistently struggle with instruction-level reasoning, especially in control flow reasoning, loop handling, and dynamic execution. Common failure modes include misinterpreting branching instructions, omitting critical operations, and relying on heuristic reasoning rather than precise instruction-level logic. Our findings highlight the need for IR-specific enhancements in LLM design. We recommend fine-tuning on structured IR datasets and integrating control-flow-sensitive architectures to improve model effectiveness. All experimental data and source code are publicly available at

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 2 Pith papers

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

  1. Can Large Language Models Recover Semantic Optimization Opportunities That Compilers Miss?

    cs.PL 2026-08 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    On the new SeGaBench benchmark, the strongest of five LLMs recovered compiler-missed optimization semantics and produced validated, speedup-delivering code changes in a large majority of cases.

  2. Position Paper: Programming Language Techniques for Bridging LLM Code Generation Semantic Gaps

    cs.SE 2025-07 unverdicted novelty 2.0 of 10

    A position paper arguing that PL techniques, especially formal verification and structure-aware representations, should be deeply integrated into LLM code generation.

Pith tools