Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 cited by

A Comparative Analysis of Large Language Models for Code Documentation Generation

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 2312.10349 v2 pith:MIS62VJD submitted 2023-12-16 cs.SE cs.AI

classification cs.SEcs.AI
keywords documentationcodegenerationmodelsstarchatbardgpt-4llms
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

This paper presents a comprehensive comparative analysis of Large Language Models (LLMs) for generation of code documentation. Code documentation is an essential part of the software writing process. The paper evaluates models such as GPT-3.5, GPT-4, Bard, Llama2, and Starchat on various parameters like Accuracy, Completeness, Relevance, Understandability, Readability and Time Taken for different levels of code documentation. Our evaluation employs a checklist-based system to minimize subjectivity, providing a more objective assessment. We find that, barring Starchat, all LLMs consistently outperform the original documentation. Notably, closed-source models GPT-3.5, GPT-4, and Bard exhibit superior performance across various parameters compared to open-source/source-available LLMs, namely LLama 2 and StarChat. Considering the time taken for generation, GPT-4 demonstrated the longest duration, followed by Llama2, Bard, with ChatGPT and Starchat having comparable generation times. Additionally, file level documentation had a considerably worse performance across all parameters (except for time taken) as compared to inline and function level documentation.

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 3 Pith papers

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

  1. MermaidSeqBench: An Evaluation Benchmark for NL-to-Mermaid Sequence Diagram Generation

    cs.SE 2025-11 unverdicted novelty 6.0 of 10

    MermaidSeqBench is a new human-verified benchmark for evaluating LLMs on natural language to Mermaid sequence diagram generation, revealing significant capability gaps across models.

  2. Development of Automated Software Design Document Review Methods Using Large Language Models

    cs.SE 2025-09 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    Converting tabular design documents into header-aware Markdown or JSON formats lets GPT models catch cross-document inconsistencies with recall up to 0.96 on short documents, but performance collapses beyond 5000 characters.

  3. Cognitive Agents Powered by Large Language Models for Agile Software Project Management

    cs.SE 2025-08 reject novelty 4.0 of 10

    LLM agents acting as Agile roles produced plausible project artifacts in simulation, but the claimed improvements over human teams are unsupported because no comparison or validated metrics are provided.

Pith tools