REVIEW 5 cited by
ALGO: Synthesizing Algorithmic Programs with LLM-Generated Oracle Verifiers
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
Signed reviews
read the original abstract
Large language models (LLMs) excel at implementing code from functionality descriptions but struggle with algorithmic problems that require not only implementation but also identification of the suitable algorithm. Moreover, LLM-generated programs lack guaranteed correctness and require human verification. To address these challenges, we propose ALGO, a framework that synthesizes Algorithmic programs with LLM-Generated Oracles to guide the generation and verify their correctness. ALGO first generates a reference oracle by prompting an LLM to exhaustively enumerate all the combinations of relevant variables. This oracle is then utilized to guide an arbitrary search strategy in exploring the algorithm space and to verify the synthesized algorithms. Our study shows that the LLM-generated oracles are correct for 88% of the cases. With the oracles as verifiers, ALGO can be integrated with any existing code generation model in a model-agnostic manner to enhance its performance. Experiments show that when equipped with ALGO, we achieve an 8x better one-submission pass rate over the Codex model and a 2.6x better one-submission pass rate over CodeT, the current state-of-the-art model on CodeContests. We can also get 1.3x better pass rate over the ChatGPT Code Interpreter on unseen problems. The problem set we used for testing, the prompts we used, the verifier and solution programs, and the test cases generated by ALGO are available at https://github.com/zkx06111/ALGO.
Forward citations
Cited by 5 Pith papers
-
Can LLMs Generate High-Quality Test Cases for Algorithm Problems? TestCase-Eval: A Systematic Evaluation of Fault Coverage and Exposure
TestCase-Eval introduces fault coverage and fault exposure tasks over 500 Codeforces problems and finds that 19 LLMs, led by Qwen3-32B, remain far below human expert performance.
-
HardTests: Synthesizing High-Quality Test Cases for LLM Coding
HardTestGen generates higher-precision, higher-recall test suites for 47,136 competitive programming problems, improving test precision by 11.3 points and recall by 17.5 points over TACO and CodeContests when judging ...
-
ACECODER: Acing Coder RL via Automated Test-Case Synthesis
ACECODER shows that automatically synthesized test cases can serve as scalable reward signals for code RL, yielding consistent gains on HumanEval, MBPP, BigCodeBench, and LiveCodeBench.
-
Enhancing Relation Extraction via Supervised Rationale Verification and Feedback
A supervised rationale verifier trained on contrastively collected biased and unbiased rationales improves few-shot relation extraction by retrieving corrective demonstrations for the LLM.
-
Leveraging Large Language Models for Command Injection Vulnerability Analysis in Python: An Empirical Study on Popular Open-Source Projects
GPT-4 detected command injection in popular Python projects with 75.5% accuracy and F1 74.5%, missing 15 real cases and beating Bandit on precision.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.