Exploring Data-Efficient Adaptation of Large Language Models for Code Generation
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Although Large Language Models (LLMs) have made significant progress in code generation, they still struggle with code generation tasks in specific scenarios. These scenarios usually necessitate the adaptation of LLMs to fulfill specific needs, but the limited training data available in practice leads to poor code generation performance. Therefore, how to effectively adapt LLMs to new scenarios with few training data is a major challenge for current code generation. In this paper, we propose a novel adaptation approach named DEED, which stands for Data-Efficient adaptation with Error-Driven learning for code generation. DEED leverages the errors made by LLMs as learning opportunities, using error revision to overcome their own shortcomings, thus achieving efficient learning. Specifically, DEED involves identifying error code generated by LLMs, employing Self-Revise for code revision, optimizing the model with revised code, and iteratively adapting the process for continuous improvement. Experimental results show that, compared to other mainstream fine-tuning approaches, DEED achieves superior performance with few training data, showing an average relative improvement of 46.2% in Pass@1 on multiple code generation benchmarks. We also validate the effectiveness of Self-Revise, which generates revised code that optimizes the model more efficiently compared to the code samples from datasets. Moreover, DEED consistently demonstrates strong performance across various LLMs, underscoring its applicability.
Key facts. Cited by 3 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 52 of its 76 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 29 Feb 2024.
Builds on
52 of 76 references.
References · 52
- 2018BERT: Pre-training of Deep Bidirectional Transformers for Language Understandingcited by 40,204
- 2020Language Models are Few-Shot Learnerscited by 32,199
- 2023LLaMA: Open and Efficient Foundation Language Modelscited by 13,958
- 2023Llama 2: Open Foundation and Fine-Tuned Chat Modelscited by 12,865
- 2021Evaluating Large Language Models Trained on Codecited by 8,053
- 2019Parameter-Efficient Transfer Learning for NLPcited by 4,195
- 2021Prefix-Tuning: Optimizing Continuous Prompts for Generationcited by 3,878
- 2021The Power of Scale for Parameter-Efficient Prompt Tuningcited by 3,769
- 2021Program Synthesis with Large Language Modelscited by 3,509
- 2023Self-Refine: Iterative Refinement with Self-Feedbackcited by 3,317
- 2019The Curious Case of Neural Text Degenerationcited by 2,881
- 2022Self-Instruct: Aligning Language Models with Self-Generated Instructionscited by 2,674
38 more
- 2021Pre-train, Prompt, and Predict: A Systematic Survey of Prompting Methods in Natural Language Processingcited by 2,222
- 2023Code Llama: Open Foundation Models for Codecited by 2,105
- 2017Decoupled Weight Decay Regularizationcited by 1,722
- 2022Competition-Level Code Generation with AlphaCodecited by 1,427
- 2021Calibrate Before Use: Improving Few-Shot Performance of Language Modelscited by 1,371
- 2023Is Your Code Generated by ChatGPT Really Correct? Rigorous Evaluation of Large Language Models for Code Generationcited by 1,332
- 2023Teaching Large Language Models to Self-Debugcited by 963
- 2022CodeGen: An Open Large Language Model for Code with Multi-Turn Program Synthesiscited by 876
- 2023WizardCoder: Empowering Code Large Language Models with Evol-Instructcited by 728
- 2021GPT Understands, Toocited by 715
- 2021P-Tuning v2: Prompt Tuning Can Be Comparable to Fine-tuning Universally Across Scales and Taskscited by 686
- 2022InCoder: A Generative Model for Code Infilling and Synthesiscited by 492
- 2022DS-1000: A Natural and Reliable Benchmark for Data Science Code Generationcited by 442
- 2022CodeT: Code Generation with Generated Testscited by 369
- 2023Self-collaboration Code Generation via ChatGPTcited by 255
- 2023Magicoder: Empowering Code Generation with OSS-Instructcited by 251
- 2023LEVER: Learning to Verify Language-to-Code Generation with Executioncited by 228
- 2023Planning with Large Language Models for Code Generationcited by 179
- 2020Better Fine-Tuning by Reducing Representational Collapsecited by 156
- 2021Raise a Child in Large Language Model: Towards Effective and Generalizable Fine-tuningcited by 145
- 2023Self-planning Code Generation with Large Language Modelscited by 121
- 2024Generalization or Memorization: Data Contamination and Trustworthy Evaluation for Large Language Modelscited by 119
- 2023Self-Edit: Fault-Aware Code Editor for Code Generationcited by 110
- 2022CERT: Continual Pre-Training on Sketches for Library-Oriented Code Generationcited by 87
- 2022Coder Reviewer Reranking for Code Generationcited by 83
- 2023Improving Code Generation by Training with Natural Language Feedbackcited by 75
- 2023CodeScore: Evaluating Code Generation by Learning Code Executioncited by 66
- 2022When Language Model Meets Private Librarycited by 54
- 2022NatGen: Generative pre-training by "Naturalizing" source codecited by 53
- 2023On the Effectiveness of Large Language Models in Domain-Specific Code Generationcited by 44
- 2021Gradual Fine-Tuning for Low-Resource Domain Adaptationcited by 23
- 2021An Empirical Study on the Usage of Transformer Models for Code Completioncited by 22
- 2023Towards Efficient Fine-tuning of Pre-trained Code Models: An Experimental Study and Beyondcited by 20
- 2023PACE: Improving Prompt with Actor-Critic Editing for Large Language Modelcited by 20
- 2017Agile Software Development Methods: Review and Analysiscited by 18
- 2022Fine-Tuning Pre-Trained Language Models Effectively by Optimizing Subnetworks Adaptivelycited by 18
- 2022Incorporating Domain Knowledge through Task Augmentation for Front-End JavaScript Code Generationcited by 11
- 2024Delving into Parameter-Efficient Fine-Tuning in Code Change Learning: An Empirical Studycited by 8
50 most cited of 52 All 52 (JSON)
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2025: 3.
3 papers.
- 2025Uncertainty-Guided Chain-of-Thought for Code Generation with LLMscited by 30
- 2025VulInstruct: Teaching LLMs Root-Cause Reasoning for Vulnerability Detection via Security Specificationscited by 4
- 2025Self-Bootstrapping Automated Program Repair: Using LLMs to Generate and Evaluate Synthetic Training Data for Bug Repaircited by 0
- 2025VulInstruct: Teaching LLMs Root-Cause Reasoning for Vulnerability Detection via Security Specifications6 Nov 2025
- 2025Self-Bootstrapping Automated Program Repair: Using LLMs to Generate and Evaluate Synthetic Training Data for Bug Repair12 May 2025
- 2025Uncertainty-Guided Chain-of-Thought for Code Generation with LLMs19 Mar 2025