REVIEW 1 cited by
Towards LLM-based optimization compilers. Can LLMs learn how to apply a single peephole optimization? Reasoning is all LLMs need!
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
Towards LLM-based optimization compilers. Can LLMs learn how to apply a single peephole optimization? Reasoning is all LLMs need!
read the original abstract
Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated great potential in various language processing tasks, and recent studies have explored their application in compiler optimizations. However, all these studies focus on the conventional open-source LLMs, such as Llama2, which lack enhanced reasoning mechanisms. In this study, we investigate the errors produced by the fine-tuned 7B-parameter Llama2 model as it attempts to learn and apply a simple peephole optimization for the AArch64 assembly code. We provide an analysis of the errors produced by the LLM and compare it with state-of-the-art OpenAI models which implement advanced reasoning logic, including GPT-4o and GPT-o1 (preview). We demonstrate that OpenAI GPT-o1, despite not being fine-tuned, outperforms the fine-tuned Llama2 and GPT-4o. Our findings indicate that this advantage is largely due to the chain-of-thought reasoning implemented in GPT-o1. We hope our work will inspire further research on using LLMs with enhanced reasoning mechanisms and chain-of-thought for code generation and optimization.
Forward citations
Cited by 1 Pith paper
-
Can Coding Agents Implement Missed Compiler Optimizations? Evaluating LLM Agents on LLVM Peephole Optimizations
No evaluated coding agent simultaneously matches human experts on behavioral validity and profitability when implementing real missed InstCombine optimizations from LLVM issues.
discussion (0)
Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.