REVIEW 1 cited by
An Empirical Comparison of Pre-Trained Models of Source Code
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
An Empirical Comparison of Pre-Trained Models of Source Code
read the original abstract
While a large number of pre-trained models of source code have been successfully developed and applied to a variety of software engineering (SE) tasks in recent years, our understanding of these pre-trained models is arguably fairly limited. With the goal of advancing our understanding of these models, we perform the first systematic empirical comparison of 19 recently-developed pre-trained models of source code on 13 SE tasks. To gain additional insights into these models, we adopt a recently-developed 4-dimensional categorization of pre-trained models, and subsequently investigate whether there are correlations between different categories of pre-trained models and their performances on different SE tasks.
Forward citations
Cited by 1 Pith paper
-
Large Language Models for Multi-Lingual Equivalent Mutant Detection: An Extended Empirical Study
LLM-based methods achieve higher F1-scores than traditional approaches for equivalent mutant detection in Java and C, with fine-tuned code embeddings performing best and showing cross-lingual generalization.
discussion (0)
Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.