mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

CoReQA: Uncovering Potentials of Language Models in Code Repository Question Answering

arXiv 2501.03447 ↗First posted 7 Jan 2025cs.SEcited by 17

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Large language models that enhance software development tasks, such as code generation, code completion, and code question answering (QA), have been extensively studied in both academia and the industry. The models are integrated into popular intelligent IDEs like JetBrains and Cursor. Current benchmarks for evaluating models' code comprehension capabilities primarily focus on code generation or completion, often neglecting QA, which is a crucial aspect of understanding code. Existing code QA benchmarks are derived from code comments with predefined patterns (e.g., CodeQA) or focus on specific domains, such as education (e.g., CS1QA). These benchmarks fail to capture the real-world complexity of software engineering and user requirements for understanding code repositories. To address this gap, we introduce CoReQA, a benchmark for Code Repository-level question answering, constructed from GitHub issues and comments from 176 popular repositories across four programming languages. Since questions and answers may include both natural language and code snippets, traditional evaluation metrics such as BLEU are inadequate for assessing repository-level QA performance. Thus, we provide an LLM-as-a-judge framework to evaluate QA performance from five aspects. Based on CoReQA, we evaluate the performance of three baselines, including two short-context models using generic retrieval strategies and one long-context model that utilizes the entire repository context. Evaluation results show that state-of-the-art proprietary and long-context models struggle to address repository-level questions effectively. Our analysis highlights the limitations of language models in assisting developers in understanding repositories and suggests future directions for improving repository comprehension systems through effective context retrieval methodologies.

Key facts. Cited by 17 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). First posted on arXiv 7 Jan 2025.

Builds on

No reference list yet.

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2025: 6; 2026: 11.

17 papers.

Sort:

By area:

  1. 2025SWE-QA: Can Language Models Answer Repository-level Code Questions?cited by 37
  2. 2025From Code Foundation Models to Agents and Applications: A Comprehensive Survey and Practical Guide to Code Intelligencecited by 13
  3. 2026SWE-QA-Pro: A Representative Benchmark and Scalable Training Recipe for Repository-Level Code Understandingcited by 9
  4. 2025SyncMind: Measuring Agent Out-of-Sync Recovery in Collaborative Software Engineeringcited by 8
  5. 2026SWE Atlas: Benchmarking Coding Agents Beyond Issue Resolutioncited by 6
  6. 2026DeployBench: Benchmarking LLM Agents for Research Artifact Deploymentcited by 6
  7. 2026RepoReasoner: Evaluating Repository-Level Code Reasoning Ability of Long-Context Language Modelscited by 5
  8. 2025Gistify! Codebase-Level Understanding via Runtime Executioncited by 4
  9. 2026Beyond Code Snippets: Benchmarking LLMs on Repository-Level Question Answeringcited by 3
  10. 2025RefactorCoderQA: Benchmarking LLMs for Multi-Domain Coding Question Solutions in Cloud and Edge Deploymentcited by 2
  11. 2026RepoProbe: Benchmarking Architecture-Aware Repository Comprehension with Checklistscited by 2
  12. 2025Empowering RepoQA-Agent based on Reinforcement Learning Driven by Monte-carlo Tree Searchcited by 1
5 more
  1. 2026Neurosymbolic Repo-level Code Localizationcited by 1
  2. 2026Deep Agentic Search for Repository-Level Code Question Answering: An Empirical Studycited by 1
  3. 2026SWE-Spot: Building Small Repo-Experts with Repository-Centric Learningcited by 0
  4. 2026DeepRepoQA: Code Repository Question Answering with Deep Agent Explorationcited by 0
  5. 2026Can LLMs Reason About Runtime Behavior? A Repository-Level Dynamic Benchmarkcited by 0