REVIEW 7 cited by
A Systematic Evaluation of Large Language Models of 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
read the original abstract
Large language models (LMs) of code have recently shown tremendous promise in completing code and synthesizing code from natural language descriptions. However, the current state-of-the-art code LMs (e.g., Codex (Chen et al., 2021)) are not publicly available, leaving many questions about their model and data design decisions. We aim to fill in some of these blanks through a systematic evaluation of the largest existing models: Codex, GPT-J, GPT-Neo, GPT-NeoX-20B, and CodeParrot, across various programming languages. Although Codex itself is not open-source, we find that existing open-source models do achieve close results in some programming languages, although targeted mainly for natural language modeling. We further identify an important missing piece in the form of a large open-source model trained exclusively on a multi-lingual corpus of code. We release a new model, PolyCoder, with 2.7B parameters based on the GPT-2 architecture, which was trained on 249GB of code across 12 programming languages on a single machine. In the C programming language, PolyCoder outperforms all models including Codex. Our trained models are open-source and publicly available at https://github.com/VHellendoorn/Code-LMs, which enables future research and application in this area.
Forward citations
Cited by 7 Pith papers
-
Pythia: A Suite for Analyzing Large Language Models Across Training and Scaling
Pythia releases 16 identically trained LLMs with full checkpoints and data tools to study training dynamics, scaling, memorization, and bias in language models.
-
Beyond Code Snippets: Benchmarking LLMs on Repository-Level Question Answering
StackRepoQA shows LLMs reach only moderate accuracy on multi-file Java QA tasks, with gains from graph-based retrieval but frequent reliance on verbatim answer reproduction.
-
RepoBench: Benchmarking Repository-Level Code Auto-Completion Systems
RepoBench is a new benchmark with retrieval, completion, and pipeline tasks to evaluate code auto-completion systems on entire repositories instead of single files.
-
InCoder: A Generative Model for Code Infilling and Synthesis
InCoder is the first generative model to directly perform zero-shot code infilling via bidirectional context from a masked-then-appended training scheme, matching left-to-right models on synthesis while improving on t...
-
Lessons from the Trenches on Reproducible Evaluation of Language Models
The paper compiles practical lessons on reproducible LM evaluation and introduces the lm-eval library to mitigate common methodological problems in NLP.
-
Analyzing Prominent LLMs: An Empirical Study of Performance and Complexity in Solving LeetCode Problems
A comparative benchmark of four LLMs on LeetCode reports that ChatGPT generates the fastest and most memory-efficient solutions, with Java faster and Python more memory-efficient.
-
A Blueprint for AI-Driven Software Quality: Integrating LLMs with Established Standards
Survey mapping LLM applications in software quality assurance to established standards including ISO/IEC 12207, ISO 25010, CMMI, and TMM, with case studies, challenges, and future directions.
Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.