mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Automatic Unit Test Data Generation and Actor-Critic Reinforcement Learning for Code Synthesis

arXiv 2310.13669 ↗First posted 20 Oct 2023cs.LG cs.AI cs.CLcited by 4

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

The advent of large pre-trained language models in the domain of Code Synthesis has shown remarkable performance on various benchmarks, treating the problem of Code Generation in a fashion similar to Natural Language Generation, trained with a Language Modelling (LM) objective. In addition, the property of programming language code being precisely evaluable with respect to its semantics -- through the use of Unit Tests to check its functional correctness -- lends itself to using Reinforcement Learning (RL) as a further training paradigm. Previous work has shown that RL can be applied as such to improve models' coding capabilities; however, such RL-based methods rely on a reward signal based on defined Unit Tests, which are much harder to obtain compared to the huge crawled code datasets used in LM objectives. In this work, we present a novel approach to automatically obtain data consisting of function signatures and associated Unit Tests, suitable for RL training of Code Synthesis models. We also introduce a straightforward, simple yet effective Actor-Critic RL training scheme and show that it, in conjunction with automatically generated training data, leads to improvement of a pre-trained code language model's performance by up to 9.9% improvement over the original underlying code synthesis LM, and up to 4.3% over RL-based models trained with standard PPO or CodeRL.

Key facts. Cited by 4 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 25 of its 40 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 20 Oct 2023.

Builds on

25 of 40 references.

References · 25

  1. 2017Attention Is All You Needcited by 59,932
  2. 2018BERT: Pre-training of Deep Bidirectional Transformers for Language Understandingcited by 40,204
  3. 2019Exploring the Limits of Transfer Learning with a Unified Text-to-Text Transformercited by 14,491
  4. 2017Proximal Policy Optimization Algorithmscited by 14,441
  5. 2021Evaluating Large Language Models Trained on Codecited by 8,053
  6. 2021On the Opportunities and Risks of Foundation Modelscited by 3,961
  7. 2021Program Synthesis with Large Language Modelscited by 3,509
  8. 2019The Curious Case of Neural Text Degenerationcited by 2,881
  9. 2020The Pile: An 800GB Dataset of Diverse Text for Language Modelingcited by 2,346
  10. 2015High-Dimensional Continuous Control Using Generalized Advantage Estimationcited by 1,916
  11. 2022Competition-Level Code Generation with AlphaCodecited by 1,427
  12. 2021CodeT5: Identifier-aware Unified Pre-trained Encoder-Decoder Models for Code Understanding and Generationcited by 890
13 more
  1. 2021Measuring Coding Challenge Competence With APPScited by 879
  2. 2022CodeGen: An Open Large Language Model for Code with Multi-Turn Program Synthesiscited by 876
  3. 2021CodeXGLUE: A Machine Learning Benchmark Dataset for Code Understanding and Generationcited by 732
  4. 2022CodeT: Code Generation with Generated Testscited by 369
  5. 2020Unsupervised Translation of Programming Languagescited by 262
  6. 2017A Survey of Machine Learning for Big Code and Naturalnesscited by 220
  7. 2020A Survey of Evaluation Metrics Used for NLG Systemscited by 164
  8. 2022Interactive Code Generation via Test-Driven User-Intent Formalizationcited by 50
  9. 2022PanGu-Coder: Program Synthesis with Function-Level Language Modelingcited by 47
  10. 2022Compilable Neural Code Generation with Compiler Feedbackcited by 46
  11. 2019Learning and Evaluating Contextual Embedding of Source Codecited by 33
  12. 2022StructCoder: Structure-Aware Transformer for Code Generationcited by 33
  13. 2022Consistent Dropout for Policy Gradient Reinforcement Learningcited by 9

Built on by

Cited by year

Citing papers per year: 2024: 3; 2025: 1.

4 papers.