CodeReviewQA: The Code Review Comprehension Assessment for Large Language Models
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
State-of-the-art large language models (LLMs) have demonstrated impressive code generation capabilities but struggle with real-world software engineering tasks, such as revising source code to address code reviews, hindering their practical use. Code review comments are often implicit, ambiguous, and colloquial, requiring models to grasp both code and human intent. This challenge calls for evaluating large language models' ability to bridge both technical and conversational contexts. While existing work has employed the automated code refinement (ACR) task to resolve these comments, current evaluation methods fall short, relying on text matching metrics that provide limited insight into model failures and remain susceptible to training data contamination. To address these limitations, we introduce a novel evaluation benchmark, CodeReviewQA that enables us to conduct fine-grained assessment of model capabilities and mitigate data contamination risks. In CodeReviewQA, we decompose the generation task of code refinement into three essential reasoning steps: textitchange type recognition (CTR), textitchange localisation (CL), and textitsolution identification (SI). Each step is reformulated as multiple-choice questions with varied difficulty levels, enabling precise assessment of model capabilities, while mitigating data contamination risks. Our comprehensive evaluation spans 72 recently released large language models on 900 manually curated, high-quality examples across nine programming languages. Our results show that CodeReviewQA is able to expose specific model weaknesses in code review comprehension, disentangled from their generative automated code refinement results.
Key facts. Cited by 3 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 22 of its 41 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 20 Mar 2025.
Builds on
22 of 41 references.
References · 22
- 2021Evaluating Large Language Models Trained on Codecited by 8,320
- 2020Measuring Massive Multitask Language Understandingcited by 7,963
- 2023Efficient Memory Management for Large Language Model Serving with PagedAttentioncited by 5,944
- 2021Program Synthesis with Large Language Modelscited by 3,637
- 2023SWE-bench: Can Language Models Resolve Real-World GitHub Issues?cited by 3,373
- 2024BigCodeBench: Benchmarking Code Generation with Diverse Function Calls and Complex Instructionscited by 546
- 2022Leveraging Large Language Models for Multiple Choice Question Answeringcited by 203
- 2022Automating Code Review Activities by Large-Scale Pre-trainingcited by 98
- 2022Using Pre-Trained Models to Boost Code Review Automationcited by 63
- 2021Towards Automating Code Review Activitiescited by 54
- 2019On Learning Meaningful Code Changes via Neural Machine Translationcited by 50
- 2023Exploring the Potential of ChatGPT in Automated Code Refinement: An Empirical Studycited by 44
10 more
- 2017Automatically Generating Commit Messages from Diffs using Neural Machine Translationcited by 42
- 2024LLMs May Perform MCQA by Selecting the Least Incorrect Optioncited by 33
- 2020Sampling in Software Engineering Research: A Critical Review and Guidelinescited by 23
- 2024Fine-Tuning and Prompt Engineering for Large Language Models-based Code Review Automationcited by 23
- 2024Code Review Automation: Strengths and Weaknesses of the State of the Artcited by 20
- 2018Predicting Usefulness of Code Review Comments using Textual Features and Developer Experiencecited by 13
- 2019Automatic Generation of Pull Request Descriptionscited by 13
- 2024Improving Automated Code Reviews: Learning from Experiencecited by 13
- 2025Too Noisy To Learn: Enhancing Data Quality for Code Review Comment Generationcited by 12
- 2018Code Review Comments: Language Matterscited by 1
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2026: 3.
3 papers.
- 2026Beyond Code Snippets: Benchmarking LLMs on Repository-Level Question Answeringcited by 3
- 2026Enhancing Large Language Models with Retrieval Augmented Generation for Software Testing and Inspection Automationcited by 0
- 2026From Static to Dynamic: Benchmarking Real-World Code Review with MCR-Benchcited by 0
- 2026From Static to Dynamic: Benchmarking Real-World Code Review with MCR-Bench27 Aug 2026
- 2026Enhancing Large Language Models with Retrieval Augmented Generation for Software Testing and Inspection Automation16 Apr 2026
- 2026Beyond Code Snippets: Benchmarking LLMs on Repository-Level Question Answering27 Mar 2026
Similar, not cited
Close in wording, no citation either way
- 2025A Code Comprehension Benchmark for Large Language Models for Code
- 2024Prompting and Fine-tuning Large Language Models for Automated Code Review Comment Generation
- 2026Beyond Output Correctness: Benchmarking and Evaluating Large Language Model Reasoning in Coding Tasks
- 2025CodeCriticBench: A Holistic Code Critique Benchmark for Large Language Models
- 2025Large Language Model Critics for Execution-Free Evaluation of Code Changes
- 2024Rethinking Code Refinement: Learning to Judge Code Efficiency
- 2025RefineCoder: Iterative Improving of Large Language Models via Adaptive Critique Refinement for Code Generation
- 2024LiveCodeBench: Holistic and Contamination Free Evaluation of Large Language Models for Code