# Bridging Code Semantic and LLMs: Semantic Chain-of-Thought Prompting for Code Generation

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2310.10698 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.10698/

## Key facts

- Cited by 6 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Placed in Reasoning for agents, planning and code, one of 17 directions in LLM reasoning.
- Builds on 34 of its 40 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 16 Oct 2023.

## Placed in

- LLM reasoning / [Reasoning for agents, planning and code](https://mlsanity.com/lr/reasoning-for-agents-planning-and-code/)

## Builds on (most cited first, 30 of 34)

- [BERT: Pre-training of Deep Bidirectional Transformers for Language Understanding](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1810.04805/) (2018)
- [Language Models are Few-Shot Learners](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2005.14165/) (2020)
- [Exploring the Limits of Transfer Learning with a Unified Text-to-Text Transformer](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1910.10683/) (2019)
- [LLaMA: Open and Efficient Foundation Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2302.13971/) (2023)
- [Chain-of-Thought Prompting Elicits Reasoning in Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2201.11903/) (2022)
- [Evaluating Large Language Models Trained on Code](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2107.03374/) (2021)
- [PaLM: Scaling Language Modeling with Pathways](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2204.02311/) (2022)
- [Program Synthesis with Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2108.07732/) (2021)
- [OPT: Open Pre-trained Transformer Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2205.01068/) (2022)
- [Tree of Thoughts: Deliberate Problem Solving with Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.10601/) (2023)
- [Self-Instruct: Aligning Language Models with Self-Generated Instructions](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2212.10560/) (2022)
- [Pre-train, Prompt, and Predict: A Systematic Survey of Prompting Methods in Natural Language Processing](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2107.13586/) (2021)
- [Code Llama: Open Foundation Models for Code](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2308.12950/) (2023)
- [Transformer-XL: Attentive Language Models Beyond a Fixed-Length Context](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1901.02860/) (2019)
- [Calibrate Before Use: Improving Few-Shot Performance of Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2102.09690/) (2021)
- [Language Models Don't Always Say What They Think: Unfaithful Explanations in Chain-of-Thought Prompting](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.04388/) (2023)
- [StarCoder: may the source be with you!](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.06161/) (2023)
- [WizardCoder: Empowering Code Large Language Models with Evol-Instruct](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2306.08568/) (2023)
- [Instruction Tuning with GPT-4](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2304.03277/) (2023)
- [Towards Reasoning in Large Language Models: A Survey](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2212.10403/) (2022)
- [Reasoning with Language Model Prompting: A Survey](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2212.09597/) (2022)
- [Structured Chain-of-Thought Prompting for Code Generation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.06599/) (2023)
- [PanGu-α: Large-scale Autoregressive Pretrained Chinese Language Models with Auto-parallel Computation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2104.12369/) (2021)
- [Self-planning Code Generation with Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2303.06689/) (2023)
- [CodeScore: Evaluating Code Generation by Learning Code Execution](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2301.09043/) (2023)
- [Synthetic Prompting: Generating Chain-of-Thought Demonstrations for Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2302.00618/) (2023)
- [Evaluating Instruction-Tuned Large Language Models on Code Comprehension and Generation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2308.01240/) (2023)
- [Re-Reading Improves Reasoning in Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2309.06275/) (2023)
- [Large Language Models are Edge-Case Fuzzers: Testing Deep Learning Libraries via FuzzGPT](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2304.02014/) (2023)
- [Benchmarking LLM powered Chatbots: Methods and Metrics](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2308.04624/) (2023)

## Built on by (most cited first, 6 of 6)

- [Agents in Software Engineering: Survey, Landscape, and Vision](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2409.09030/) (2024)
- [SuperCoder2.0: Technical Report on Exploring the feasibility of LLMs as Autonomous Programmer](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2409.11190/) (2024)
- [Understanding Chain-of-Thought Effectiveness in Code Generation: An Empirical and Information-Theoretic Analysis](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2512.09679/) (2025)
- [Bridging the Language Gap: Enhancing Multilingual Prompt-Based Code Generation in LLMs via Zero-Shot Cross-Lingual Transfer](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2408.09701/) (2024)
- [Knowledge-Graph-Driven Data Synthesis for Low-Resource Software Development: A HarmonyOS Case Study](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2512.00380/) (2025)
- [Reasoning Distillation and Structural Alignment for Improved Code Generation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2510.17598/) (2025)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Large language models (LLMs) have showcased remarkable prowess in code generation. However, automated code generation is still challenging since it requires a high-level semantic mapping between natural language requirements and codes. Most existing LLMs-based approaches for code generation rely on decoder-only causal language models often treate codes merely as plain text tokens, i.e., feeding the requirements as a prompt input, and outputing code as flat sequence of tokens, potentially missing the rich semantic features inherent in source code. To bridge this gap, this paper proposes the "Semantic Chain-of-Thought" approach to intruduce semantic information of code, named SeCoT. Our motivation is that the semantic information of the source code (eg data flow and control flow) describes more precise program execution behavior, intention and function. By guiding LLM consider and integrate semantic information, we can achieve a more granular understanding and representation of code, enhancing code generation accuracy. Meanwhile, while traditional techniques leveraging such semantic information require complex static or dynamic code analysis to obtain features such as data flow and control flow, SeCoT demonstrates that this process can be fully automated via the intrinsic capabilities of LLMs (i.e., in-context learning), while being generalizable and applicable to challenging domains. While SeCoT can be applied with different LLMs, this paper focuses on the powerful GPT-style models: ChatGPT(close-source model) and WizardCoder(open-source model). The experimental study on three popular DL benchmarks (i.e., HumanEval, HumanEval-ET and MBPP) shows that SeCoT can achieves state-of-the-art performance, greatly improving the potential for large models and code generation.