{"record_type":"pith_number_record","schema_url":"https://pith.science/schemas/pith-number/v1.json","pith_number":"pith:2023:7VPGDM4M5RREGUVOS7PECPMVIF","short_pith_number":"pith:7VPGDM4M","schema_version":"1.0","canonical_sha256":"fd5e61b38cec624352ae97de413d954152f05592c90a74ea2b635c38051ed8ba","source":{"kind":"arxiv","id":"2308.08784","version":2},"attestation_state":"computed","paper":{"title":"CodeCoT: Tackling Code Syntax Errors in CoT Reasoning for Code Generation","license":"http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/","headline":"","cross_cats":["cs.AI"],"primary_cat":"cs.SE","authors_text":"Dong Huang, Heming Cui, Qingwen Bu, Yuhao Qing","submitted_at":"2023-08-17T04:58:51Z","abstract_excerpt":"Chain-of-thought (CoT) has emerged as a groundbreaking tool in NLP, notably for its efficacy in complex reasoning tasks, such as mathematical proofs. However, its application in code generation faces a distinct challenge, i.e., although the code generated with CoT reasoning is logically correct, it faces the problem of syntax error (e.g., invalid syntax error report) during code execution, which causes the CoT result's pass@1 in HumanEval even lower than the zero-shot result.\n  In this paper, we present Code Chain-of-Thought (CodeCoT) that integrates CoT with a self-examination process for cod"},"verification_status":{"content_addressed":true,"pith_receipt":true,"author_attested":false,"weak_author_claims":0,"strong_author_claims":0,"externally_anchored":false,"storage_verified":false,"citation_signatures":0,"replication_records":0,"graph_snapshot":true,"references_resolved":false,"formal_links_present":false},"canonical_record":{"source":{"id":"2308.08784","kind":"arxiv","version":2},"metadata":{"license":"http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/","primary_cat":"cs.SE","submitted_at":"2023-08-17T04:58:51Z","cross_cats_sorted":["cs.AI"],"title_canon_sha256":"b56169cc7036c1e3cde152a06a3043c7efb1657bb2da2f4d408f0e83541989bb","abstract_canon_sha256":"6a0beeb159a301c044d7a024df9b4c0dda81e16108715888eeb5c4bbcf7503c9"},"schema_version":"1.0"},"receipt":{"kind":"pith_receipt","key_id":"pith-v1-2026-05","algorithm":"ed25519","signed_at":"2026-07-05T07:48:31.218120Z","signature_b64":"Z+SDl2uGxAjDPKyZL9Q86d277PWokZBOMhzCe/3OZ9hvONI9XR5LIwdqaPv6qZGo/slwNdmGNiuC5KoS9FmJDg==","signed_message":"canonical_sha256_bytes","builder_version":"pith-number-builder-2026-05-17-v1","receipt_version":"0.3","canonical_sha256":"fd5e61b38cec624352ae97de413d954152f05592c90a74ea2b635c38051ed8ba","last_reissued_at":"2026-07-05T07:48:31.217462Z","signature_status":"signed_v1","first_computed_at":"2026-07-05T07:48:31.217462Z","public_key_fingerprint":"8d4b5ee74e4693bcd1df2446408b0d54"},"graph_snapshot":{"paper":{"title":"CodeCoT: Tackling Code Syntax Errors in CoT Reasoning for Code Generation","license":"http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/","headline":"","cross_cats":["cs.AI"],"primary_cat":"cs.SE","authors_text":"Dong Huang, Heming Cui, Qingwen Bu, Yuhao Qing","submitted_at":"2023-08-17T04:58:51Z","abstract_excerpt":"Chain-of-thought (CoT) has emerged as a groundbreaking tool in NLP, notably for its efficacy in complex reasoning tasks, such as mathematical proofs. However, its application in code generation faces a distinct challenge, i.e., although the code generated with CoT reasoning is logically correct, it faces the problem of syntax error (e.g., invalid syntax error report) during code execution, which causes the CoT result's pass@1 in HumanEval even lower than the zero-shot result.\n  In this paper, we present Code Chain-of-Thought (CodeCoT) that integrates CoT with a self-examination process for cod"},"claims":{"count":0,"items":[],"snapshot_sha256":"258153158e38e3291e3d48162225fcdb2d5a3ed65a07baac614ab91432fd4f57"},"source":{"id":"2308.08784","kind":"arxiv","version":2},"verdict":{"id":null,"model_set":{},"created_at":null,"strongest_claim":"","one_line_summary":"","pipeline_version":null,"weakest_assumption":"","pith_extraction_headline":""},"integrity":{"clean":true,"summary":{"advisory":0,"critical":0,"by_detector":{},"informational":0},"endpoint":"/pith/2308.08784/integrity.json","findings":[],"available":true,"detectors_run":[],"snapshot_sha256":"c28c3603d3b5d939e8dc4c7e95fa8dfce3d595e45f758748cecf8e644a296938"},"references":{"count":0,"sample":[],"resolved_work":0,"snapshot_sha256":"258153158e38e3291e3d48162225fcdb2d5a3ed65a07baac614ab91432fd4f57","internal_anchors":0},"formal_canon":{"evidence_count":0,"snapshot_sha256":"258153158e38e3291e3d48162225fcdb2d5a3ed65a07baac614ab91432fd4f57"},"author_claims":{"count":0,"strong_count":0,"snapshot_sha256":"258153158e38e3291e3d48162225fcdb2d5a3ed65a07baac614ab91432fd4f57"},"builder_version":"pith-number-builder-2026-05-17-v1"},"aliases":[{"alias_kind":"arxiv","alias_value":"2308.08784","created_at":"2026-07-05T07:48:31.217534+00:00"},{"alias_kind":"arxiv_version","alias_value":"2308.08784v2","created_at":"2026-07-05T07:48:31.217534+00:00"},{"alias_kind":"doi","alias_value":"10.48550/arxiv.2308.08784","created_at":"2026-07-05T07:48:31.217534+00:00"},{"alias_kind":"pith_short_12","alias_value":"7VPGDM4M5RRE","created_at":"2026-07-05T07:48:31.217534+00:00"},{"alias_kind":"pith_short_16","alias_value":"7VPGDM4M5RREGUVO","created_at":"2026-07-05T07:48:31.217534+00:00"},{"alias_kind":"pith_short_8","alias_value":"7VPGDM4M","created_at":"2026-07-05T07:48:31.217534+00:00"}],"events":[],"event_summary":{},"paper_claims":[],"inbound_citations":{"count":6,"internal_anchor_count":0,"sample":[{"citing_arxiv_id":"2409.02977","citing_title":"Large Language Model-Based Agents for Software Engineering: A Survey","ref_index":99,"is_internal_anchor":false},{"citing_arxiv_id":"2312.13010","citing_title":"AgentCoder: Multi-Agent-based Code Generation with Iterative Testing and Optimisation","ref_index":18,"is_internal_anchor":false},{"citing_arxiv_id":"2603.28653","citing_title":"BACE: LLM-based Code Generation through Bayesian Anchored Co-Evolution of Code and Test Populations","ref_index":14,"is_internal_anchor":false},{"citing_arxiv_id":"2512.13564","citing_title":"Memory in the Age of AI Agents","ref_index":251,"is_internal_anchor":false},{"citing_arxiv_id":"2604.21598","citing_title":"You Don't Need Public Tests to Generate Correct Code","ref_index":5,"is_internal_anchor":false},{"citing_arxiv_id":"2604.16198","citing_title":"Bridging the Gap between User Intent and LLM: A Requirement Alignment Approach for Code Generation","ref_index":19,"is_internal_anchor":false}]},"formal_canon":{"evidence_count":0,"sample":[],"anchors":[]},"links":{"html":"https://pith.science/pith/7VPGDM4M5RREGUVOS7PECPMVIF","json":"https://pith.science/pith/7VPGDM4M5RREGUVOS7PECPMVIF.json","graph_json":"https://pith.science/api/pith-number/7VPGDM4M5RREGUVOS7PECPMVIF/graph.json","events_json":"https://pith.science/api/pith-number/7VPGDM4M5RREGUVOS7PECPMVIF/events.json","paper":"https://pith.science/paper/7VPGDM4M"},"agent_actions":{"view_html":"https://pith.science/pith/7VPGDM4M5RREGUVOS7PECPMVIF","download_json":"https://pith.science/pith/7VPGDM4M5RREGUVOS7PECPMVIF.json","view_paper":"https://pith.science/paper/7VPGDM4M","resolve_alias":"https://pith.science/api/pith-number/resolve?arxiv=2308.08784&json=true","fetch_graph":"https://pith.science/api/pith-number/7VPGDM4M5RREGUVOS7PECPMVIF/graph.json","fetch_events":"https://pith.science/api/pith-number/7VPGDM4M5RREGUVOS7PECPMVIF/events.json","actions":{"anchor_timestamp":"https://pith.science/pith/7VPGDM4M5RREGUVOS7PECPMVIF/action/timestamp_anchor","attest_storage":"https://pith.science/pith/7VPGDM4M5RREGUVOS7PECPMVIF/action/storage_attestation","attest_author":"https://pith.science/pith/7VPGDM4M5RREGUVOS7PECPMVIF/action/author_attestation","sign_citation":"https://pith.science/pith/7VPGDM4M5RREGUVOS7PECPMVIF/action/citation_signature","submit_replication":"https://pith.science/pith/7VPGDM4M5RREGUVOS7PECPMVIF/action/replication_record"}},"created_at":"2026-07-05T07:48:31.217534+00:00","updated_at":"2026-07-05T07:48:31.217534+00:00"}