An evaluation of LLM code generation capabilities through graded exercises
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Large Language Models have shown prominent capabilities in generating functional code from natural language descriptions. However, a standardized way to evaluate these capabilities in an objective and unbiased manner is still to be found. In this paper we review the current evaluation methods available to this end, and run a new evaluation of the performance of one state-of-the-art model (GPT4-o-mini) in solving curated coding challenges in 8 programming languages, obtained from Codewars, a software development community. Our analysis shows that the chance of success of the model has a positive correlation with the task difficulty, the popularity of the programming language being used and the time elapsed since the publication of the challenge. A further approximate explanatory analysis in terms of high-level features hints that while 46.6% of the model performance could be attributed to task difficulty, a 37.4% seems to be related to leakage of the challenge solutions into the model training set, while the remaining 16% depends on the programming language. These results suggest that current evaluation methodologies might be overestimating the actual skill of Large Language Models for generating functional code.
Key facts. Cited by 3 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 57 of its 82 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 6 Oct 2024.
Builds on
57 of 82 references.
References · 57
- 2017Attention Is All You Needcited by 60,361
- 2020Language Models are Few-Shot Learnerscited by 32,419
- 2022Training language models to follow instructions with human feedbackcited by 15,971
- 2017Proximal Policy Optimization Algorithmscited by 15,215
- 2024The Llama 3 Herd of Modelscited by 14,715
- 2019Exploring the Limits of Transfer Learning with a Unified Text-to-Text Transformercited by 14,599
- 2023LLaMA: Open and Efficient Foundation Language Modelscited by 14,132
- 2019RoBERTa: A Robustly Optimized BERT Pretraining Approachcited by 13,372
- 2023Llama 2: Open Foundation and Fine-Tuned Chat Modelscited by 13,028
- 2021Evaluating Large Language Models Trained on Codecited by 8,320
- 2017A Unified Approach to Interpreting Model Predictionscited by 6,555
- 2021Measuring Mathematical Problem Solving With the MATH Datasetcited by 5,371
38 more
- 2016XGBoost: A Scalable Tree Boosting Systemcited by 5,166
- 2018GLUE: A Multi-Task Benchmark and Analysis Platform for Natural Language Understandingcited by 4,899
- 2017Deep reinforcement learning from human preferencescited by 3,912
- 2021Finetuned Language Models Are Zero-Shot Learnerscited by 3,780
- 2021Program Synthesis with Large Language Modelscited by 3,637
- 2023Lost in the Middle: How Language Models Use Long Contextscited by 3,455
- 2023SWE-bench: Can Language Models Resolve Real-World GitHub Issues?cited by 3,373
- 2023GPQA: A Graduate-Level Google-Proof Q&A Benchmarkcited by 2,879
- 2020Learning to summarize from human feedbackcited by 2,588
- 2020DeBERTa: Decoding-enhanced BERT with Disentangled Attentioncited by 2,181
- 2022BLOOM: A 176B-Parameter Open-Access Multilingual Language Modelcited by 1,984
- 2024MMLU-Pro: A More Robust and Challenging Multi-Task Language Understanding Benchmarkcited by 1,848
- 2024Mixtral of Expertscited by 1,823
- 2022Challenging BIG-Bench Tasks and Whether Chain-of-Thought Can Solve Themcited by 1,807
- 2021Calibrate Before Use: Improving Few-Shot Performance of Language Modelscited by 1,392
- 2023Is Your Code Generated by ChatGPT Really Correct? Rigorous Evaluation of Large Language Models for Code Generationcited by 1,391
- 2023Instruction-Following Evaluation for Large Language Modelscited by 1,228
- 2024Chatbot Arena: An Open Platform for Evaluating LLMs by Human Preferencecited by 1,184
- 2024DeepSeek-Coder: When the Large Language Model Meets Programming -- The Rise of Code Intelligencecited by 1,181
- 2023Large Language Models are not Fair Evaluatorscited by 1,085
- 2021Measuring Coding Challenge Competence With APPScited by 902
- 2023StarCoder: may the source be with you!cited by 799
- 2021CodeXGLUE: A Machine Learning Benchmark Dataset for Code Understanding and Generationcited by 744
- 2024BigCodeBench: Benchmarking Code Generation with Diverse Function Calls and Complex Instructionscited by 546
- 2023The Falcon Series of Open Language Modelscited by 535
- 2024StarCoder 2 and The Stack v2: The Next Generationcited by 502
- 2020CodeBLEU: a Method for Automatic Evaluation of Code Synthesiscited by 479
- 2024Prometheus 2: An Open Source Language Model Specialized in Evaluating Other Language Modelscited by 446
- 2019CamemBERT: a Tasty French Language Modelcited by 368
- 2024Humans or LLMs as the Judge? A Study on Judgement Biasescited by 323
- 2023CodeGeeX: A Pre-Trained Model for Code Generation with Multilingual Benchmarking on HumanEval-Xcited by 300
- 2023MuSR: Testing the Limits of Chain-of-thought with Multistep Soft Reasoningcited by 201
- 2019SPoC: Search-based Pseudocode to Codecited by 176
- 2023Are Emergent Abilities in Large Language Models just In-Context Learning?cited by 109
- 2022Execution-Based Evaluation for Open-Domain Code Generationcited by 91
- 2024Stable LM 2 1.6B Technical Reportcited by 90
- 2024HumanEval-XL: A Multilingual Code Generation Benchmark for Cross-lingual Natural Language Generalizationcited by 86
- 2017A parallel corpus of Python functions and documentation strings for automated code documentation and code generationcited by 57
50 most cited of 57 All 57 (JSON)
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2025: 2; 2026: 1.
3 papers.