mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

On Unified Prompt Tuning for Request Quality Assurance in Public Code Review

arXiv 2404.07942 ↗First posted 11 Apr 2024cs.SE cs.AIcited by 1

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Public Code Review (PCR) can be implemented through a Software Question Answering (SQA) community, which facilitates high knowledge dissemination. Current methods mainly focus on the reviewer's perspective, including finding a capable reviewer, predicting comment quality, and recommending/generating review comments. Our intuition is that satisfying review necessity requests can increase their visibility, which in turn is a prerequisite for better review responses. To this end, we propose a unified framework called UniPCR to complete developer-based request quality assurance (i.e., predicting request necessity and recommending tags subtask) under a Masked Language Model (MLM). Specifically, we reformulate both subtasks via 1) text prompt tuning, which converts two subtasks into MLM by constructing prompt templates using hard prompt; 2) code prefix tuning, which optimizes a small segment of generated continuous vectors as the prefix of the code representation using soft prompt. Experimental results on the Public Code Review dataset for the time span 2011-2022 demonstrate that our UniPCR framework adapts to the two subtasks and outperforms comparable accuracy-based results with state-of-the-art methods for request quality assurance. These conclusions highlight the effectiveness of our unified framework from the developer's perspective in public code review.

Key facts. Cited by 1 paper in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 26 of its 44 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 11 Apr 2024.

Builds on

26 of 44 references.

References · 26

  1. 2018BERT: Pre-training of Deep Bidirectional Transformers for Language Understandingcited by 40,204
  2. 2014Adam: A Method for Stochastic Optimizationcited by 36,960
  3. 2020Language Models are Few-Shot Learnerscited by 32,199
  4. 2019Exploring the Limits of Transfer Learning with a Unified Text-to-Text Transformercited by 14,491
  5. 2019RoBERTa: A Robustly Optimized BERT Pretraining Approachcited by 13,266
  6. 2021Prefix-Tuning: Optimizing Continuous Prompts for Generationcited by 3,878
  7. 2019ALBERT: A Lite BERT for Self-supervised Learning of Language Representationscited by 2,772
  8. 2021Pre-train, Prompt, and Predict: A Systematic Survey of Prompting Methods in Natural Language Processingcited by 2,222
  9. 2020Making Pre-trained Language Models Better Few-shot Learnerscited by 1,255
  10. 2021P-Tuning v2: Prompt Tuning Can Be Comparable to Fine-tuning Universally Across Scales and Taskscited by 686
  11. 2020It's Not Just Size That Matters: Small Language Models Are Also Few-Shot Learnerscited by 668
  12. 2021Multimodal Few-Shot Learning with Frozen Language Modelscited by 657
14 more
  1. 2020GraphCodeBERT: Pre-training Code Representations with Data Flowcited by 600
  2. 2021Image Segmentation Using Text and Image Promptscited by 509
  3. 2021PTR: Prompt Tuning with Rules for Text Classificationcited by 238
  4. 2017Learning to Represent Programs with Graphscited by 219
  5. 2019Commonsense Knowledge Mining from Pretrained Modelscited by 189
  6. 2022Coder Reviewer Reranking for Code Generationcited by 83
  7. 2019OpenNRE: An Open and Extensible Toolkit for Neural Relation Extractioncited by 62
  8. 2023LLaMA-Reviewer: Advancing Code Review Automation with Large Language Models through Parameter-Efficient Fine-Tuningcited by 47
  9. 2021NSP-BERT: A Prompt-based Few-Shot Learner Through an Original Pre-training Task--Next Sentence Predictioncited by 23
  10. 2017Easy over Hard: A Case Study on Deep Learningcited by 20
  11. 2022PTM4Tag: Sharpening Tag Recommendation of Stack Overflow Posts with Pre-trained Modelscited by 15
  12. 2018Predicting Usefulness of Code Review Comments using Textual Features and Developer Experiencecited by 13
  13. 2023Code Reviewer Recommendation for Architecture Violations: An Exploratory Studycited by 3
  14. 2021Developers Perception of Peer Code Review in Research Software Developmentcited by 1

Built on by

Cited by year

Citing papers per year: 2024: 1.

1 paper.