Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 cited by

CodeReviewQA: The Code Review Comprehension Assessment for Large Language Models

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 2503.16167 v2 pith:ALOJVAU3 submitted 2025-03-20 cs.SE cs.CL

classification cs.SEcs.CL
keywords codemodelscodereviewqalanguagelargemodelassessmentcapabilities
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
abstract

State-of-the-art large language models (LLMs) have demonstrated impressive code generation capabilities but struggle with real-world software engineering tasks, such as revising source code to address code reviews, hindering their practical use. Code review comments are often implicit, ambiguous, and colloquial, requiring models to grasp both code and human intent. This challenge calls for evaluating large language models' ability to bridge both technical and conversational contexts. While existing work has employed the automated code refinement (ACR) task to resolve these comments, current evaluation methods fall short, relying on text matching metrics that provide limited insight into model failures and remain susceptible to training data contamination. To address these limitations, we introduce a novel evaluation benchmark, $\textbf{CodeReviewQA}$ that enables us to conduct fine-grained assessment of model capabilities and mitigate data contamination risks. In CodeReviewQA, we decompose the generation task of code refinement into $\textbf{three essential reasoning steps}$: $\textit{change type recognition}$ (CTR), $\textit{change localisation}$ (CL), and $\textit{solution identification}$ (SI). Each step is reformulated as multiple-choice questions with varied difficulty levels, enabling precise assessment of model capabilities, while mitigating data contamination risks. Our comprehensive evaluation spans 72 recently released large language models on $\textbf{900 manually curated, high-quality examples}$ across nine programming languages. Our results show that CodeReviewQA is able to expose specific model weaknesses in code review comprehension, disentangled from their generative automated code refinement results.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID 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. Towards Iterative End-to-End Software Development: A Feature-Driven Multi-Agent Framework

    cs.SE 2025-11 unverdicted novelty 6.0 of 10

    EvoDev introduces an iterative feature-driven framework with a DAG-based Feature Map for context propagation that improves LLM agent performance on end-to-end software development tasks by 56.8% over the best baseline.

  2. CRScore++: Reinforcement Learning with Verifiable Tool and AI Feedback for Code Review

    cs.SE 2025-05 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    A two-stage SFT+DPO pipeline using linter and code-smell tool outputs plus an LLM judge improves generated code review comments and appears to transfer from Python to Java and JavaScript, though the judge-based evalua...

Pith tools