mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

An Exploratory Literature Study on Sharing and Energy Use of Language Models for Source Code

arXiv 2307.02443 ↗First posted 5 Jul 2023cs.SE cs.AI cs.CLcited by 1

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Large language models trained on source code can support a variety of software development tasks, such as code recommendation and program repair. Large amounts of data for training such models benefit the models' performance. However, the size of the data and models results in long training times and high energy consumption. While publishing source code allows for replicability, users need to repeat the expensive training process if models are not shared. The main goal of the study is to investigate if publications that trained language models for software engineering (SE) tasks share source code and trained artifacts. The second goal is to analyze the transparency on training energy usage. We perform a snowballing-based literature search to find publications on language models for source code, and analyze their reusability from a sustainability standpoint. From 494 unique publications, we identified 293 relevant publications that use language models to address code-related tasks. Among them, 27% (79 out of 293) make artifacts available for reuse. This can be in the form of tools or IDE plugins designed for specific tasks or task-agnostic models that can be fine-tuned for a variety of downstream tasks. Moreover, we collect insights on the hardware used for model training, as well as training time, which together determine the energy consumption of the development process. We find that there are deficiencies in the sharing of information and artifacts for current studies on source code models for software engineering tasks, with 40% of the surveyed papers not sharing source code or trained artifacts. We recommend the sharing of source code as well as trained artifacts, to enable sustainable reproducibility. Moreover, comprehensive information on training times and hardware configurations should be shared for transparency on a model's carbon footprint.

Key facts. Cited by 1 paper in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 76 of its 129 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 5 Jul 2023.

Builds on

76 of 129 references.

References · 76

  1. 2020Language Models are Few-Shot Learnerscited by 32,199
  2. 2021Evaluating Large Language Models Trained on Codecited by 8,053
  3. 2013Distributed Representations of Words and Phrases and their Compositionalitycited by 3,462
  4. 2022BLOOM: A 176B-Parameter Open-Access Multilingual Language Modelcited by 1,968
  5. 2020CodeBERT: A Pre-Trained Model for Programming and Natural Languagescited by 1,286
  6. 2019Energy and Policy Considerations for Deep Learning in NLPcited by 1,242
  7. 2021CodeT5: Identifier-aware Unified Pre-trained Encoder-Decoder Models for Code Understanding and Generationcited by 890
  8. 2021CodeXGLUE: A Machine Learning Benchmark Dataset for Code Understanding and Generationcited by 732
  9. 2019VideoBERT: A Joint Model for Video and Language Representation Learningcited by 702
  10. 2019Green AIcited by 620
  11. 2020GraphCodeBERT: Pre-training Code Representations with Data Flowcited by 600
  12. 2019Quantifying the Carbon Emissions of Machine Learningcited by 516
38 more
  1. 2021Unified Pre-training for Program Understanding and Generationcited by 361
  2. 2020Improving Reproducibility in Machine Learning Research (A Report from the NeurIPS 2019 Reproducibility Program)cited by 318
  3. 2022Estimating the Carbon Footprint of BLOOM, a 176B Parameter Language Modelcited by 264
  4. 2020Unsupervised Translation of Programming Languagescited by 262
  5. 2018code2vec: Learning Distributed Representations of Codecited by 249
  6. 2020Towards the Systematic Reporting of the Energy and Carbon Footprints of Machine Learningcited by 246
  7. 2020IntelliCode Compose: Code Generation Using Transformercited by 225
  8. 2018code2seq: Generating Sequences from Structured Representations of Codecited by 177
  9. 2018SequenceR: Sequence-to-Sequence Learning for End-to-End Program Repaircited by 144
  10. 2020Deep Learning based Vulnerability Detection: Are We There Yet?cited by 142
  11. 2021CURE: Code-Aware Neural Machine Translation for Automatic Program Repaircited by 85
  12. 2020Improved Code Summarization via a Graph Neural Networkcited by 79
  13. 2023A Systematic Review of Green AIcited by 77
  14. 2020Contrastive Code Representation Learningcited by 76
  15. 2021CoSQA: 20,000+ Web Queries for Code Search and Question Answeringcited by 74
  16. 2018A Retrieve-and-Edit Framework for Predicting Structured Outputscited by 73
  17. 2021Studying the Usage of Text-To-Text Transfer Transformer to Support Code-Related Taskscited by 70
  18. 2021DOBF: A Deobfuscation Pre-Training Objective for Programming Languagescited by 68
  19. 2018DeepBugs: A Learning Approach to Name-based Bug Detectioncited by 65
  20. 2021Language-Agnostic Representation Learning of Source Code from Structure and Contextcited by 63
  21. 2019Adversarial Examples for Models of Codecited by 61
  22. 2021CoTexT: Multi-task Learning with Code-Text Transformercited by 61
  23. 2021Vulnerability Detection with Fine-grained Interpretationscited by 56
  24. 2019Pythia: AI-assisted Code Completion Systemcited by 54
  25. 2020Big Code != Big Vocabulary: Open-Vocabulary Models for Source Codecited by 53
  26. 2022VulBERTa: Simplified Source Code Pre-Training for Vulnerability Detectioncited by 51
  27. 2019On Learning Meaningful Code Changes via Neural Machine Translationcited by 50
  28. 2021Neural Program Repair with Execution-based Backpropagationcited by 50
  29. 2020LambdaNet: Probabilistic Type Inference using Graph Neural Networkscited by 44
  30. 2018CODIT: Code Editing with Tree-Based Neural Modelscited by 40
  31. 2020CC2Vec: Distributed Representations of Code Changescited by 38
  32. 2020Incorporating External Knowledge through Pre-training for Natural Language to Code Generationcited by 36
  33. 2021Neural Transfer Learning for Repairing Security Vulnerabilities in C Codecited by 36
  34. 2020A Systematic Literature Review on the Use of Deep Learning in Software Engineering Researchcited by 35
  35. 2022SPT-Code: Sequence-to-Sequence Pre-Training for Learning Source Code Representationscited by 35
  36. 2020Improved Automatic Summarization of Subroutines via Attention to File Contextcited by 34
  37. 2022StructCoder: Structure-Aware Transformer for Code Generationcited by 33
  38. 2021ProphetNet-X: Large-Scale Pre-training Models for English, Chinese, Multi-lingual, Dialog, and Code Generationcited by 31

50 most cited of 76 All 76 (JSON)

Built on by

Cited by year

Citing papers per year: 2024: 1.

1 paper.