# CodeAlignBench: Assessing Code Generation Models on Developer-Preferred Code Adjustments

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2510.27565 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2510.27565/

## Key facts

- No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Builds on 21 of its 25 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 31 Oct 2025.

## Builds on (most cited first, 21 of 21)

- [Evaluating Large Language Models Trained on Code](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2107.03374/) (2021)
- [Program Synthesis with Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2108.07732/) (2021)
- [SWE-bench: Can Language Models Resolve Real-World GitHub Issues?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.06770/) (2023)
- [LiveCodeBench: Holistic and Contamination Free Evaluation of Large Language Models for Code](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2403.07974/) (2024)
- [Rethinking the Role of Demonstrations: What Makes In-Context Learning Work?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2202.12837/) (2022)
- [Instruction-Following Evaluation for Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2311.07911/) (2023)
- [Measuring Coding Challenge Competence With APPS](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2105.09938/) (2021)
- [A Survey on Large Language Models for Code Generation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2406.00515/) (2024)
- [BigCodeBench: Benchmarking Code Generation with Diverse Function Calls and Complex Instructions](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2406.15877/) (2024)
- [Large Language Models for Software Engineering: A Systematic Literature Review](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2308.10620/) (2023)
- [RepoBench: Benchmarking Repository-Level Code Auto-Completion Systems](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2306.03091/) (2023)
- [Evaluating Large Language Models at Evaluating Instruction Following](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.07641/) (2023)
- [LiveBench: A Challenging, Contamination-Limited LLM Benchmark](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2406.19314/) (2024)
- [ClassEval: A Manually-Crafted Benchmark for Evaluating LLMs on Class-level Code Generation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2308.01861/) (2023)
- [DevEval: A Manually-Annotated Code Generation Benchmark Aligned with Real-World Code Repositories](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2405.19856/) (2024)
- [LLM-in-the-loop: Leveraging Large Language Model for Thematic Analysis](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.15100/) (2023)
- [CodeUltraFeedback: An LLM-as-a-Judge Dataset for Aligning Large Language Models to Coding Preferences](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2403.09032/) (2024)
- [LIFBench: Evaluating the Instruction Following Performance and Stability of Large Language Models in Long-Context Scenarios](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2411.07037/) (2024)
- [From Complex to Simple: Enhancing Multi-Constraint Complex Instruction Following Ability of Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2404.15846/) (2024)
- [M-IFEval: Multilingual Instruction-Following Evaluation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2502.04688/) (2025)
- [CodeIF-Bench: Evaluating Instruction-Following Capabilities of Large Language Models in Interactive Code Generation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2503.22688/) (2025)

## Abstract (arXiv)

As large language models become increasingly capable of generating code, evaluating their performance remains a complex and evolving challenge. Existing benchmarks primarily focus on functional correctness, overlooking the diversity of real-world coding tasks and developer expectations. To this end, we introduce a multi-language benchmark that evaluates LLM instruction-following capabilities and is extensible to operate on any set of standalone coding problems. Our benchmark evaluates instruction following in two key settings: adherence to pre-defined constraints specified with the initial problem, and the ability to perform refinements based on follow-up instructions. For this paper's analysis, we empirically evaluated our benchmarking pipeline with programming tasks from LiveBench, that are also automatically translated from Python into Java and JavaScript. Our automated benchmark reveals that models exhibit differing levels of performance across multiple dimensions of instruction-following. Our benchmarking pipeline provides a more comprehensive evaluation of code generation models, highlighting their strengths and limitations across languages and generation goals.