arXiv:2508. 16131v3 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Code completion entails the task of providing missing tokens given a surrounding context.
arXiv:2506. 02791v4 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: In recent years, code intelligence has gained increasing importance in the field of automated software engineering.
arXiv:2609.37405v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used for software engineering tasks that require understanding existing source code, including behavior...
arXiv:2607. 01903v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: LLM-integrated applications blend natural language prompts with program code, and much of their runtime behavior originates in the prompt layer rather than in the code itself.
arXiv:2606. 08840v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Code generation models are typically compared using compact execution benchmarks and aggregate pass rates, but such summaries obscure how performance varies across programming languages, problem families, and failure modes.
LLM-integrated applications blend natural language prompts with program code, and much of their runtime behavior originates in the prompt layer rather than in the code itself. Existing complexity metrics, however, operate solely at the code level and therefore overlook this behavioral logic entirely.
The paper introduces PolyHuman, a dataset of human-written programs in C++, Java, and Python, to test whether large language models can judge functional equivalence across languages. Using this dataset, the authors evaluate several open-weight and proprietary LLMs, finding that models struggle more with harder problems, show language-specific biases, and rely partly on superficial similarity cues. They also observe run‑to‑run instability in GPT‑o4‑mini, concluding that current LLMs do not reliably capture functional equivalence within or across programming languages.
arXiv:2607. 12273v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: As Code Large Language Models (LLMs) become central to modern software engineering, their inherent stochasticity poses significant real-world risks, where even minor errors can lead to severe functional, security, or safety consequences.
The paper introduces Program Executability Prediction (PrEx), a task that asks large language models (LLMs) to determine whether a program is semantically valid or invalid and, if invalid, to identify the violated formal rule. To evaluate this, the authors create a dataset of systematically generated invalid programs derived from valid ones and test open‑source coding LLMs across different semantic formalisms, semantic shifts, and program splits (human‑written, LLM‑translated, fuzzer‑generated). Results show that LLMs rely more on pre‑training priors than on the provided semantics, performing poorly on modified semantics and with increasing program complexity.
arXiv:2606. 08676v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: AI coding assistants have significantly improved developer productivity by automatically suggesting code that aligns with user intent, and many of these tools are now integrated directly into Integrated Development Environments (IDEs).
arXiv:2609.22102v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large Language Models (LLMs) are widely used as programming assistants, yet it remains unclear whether and how user's demographic information impacts...
arXiv:2609.22097v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: The evaluation of large language models (LLMs) on coding tasks has primarily focused on performance metrics such as pass@k. As LLMs continue to advan...
arXiv:2607. 18642v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Mined code corpora are abundant but uncontrolled: a snippet's semantics, surface "messiness," and difficulty are whatever the wild contained; there is no known-optimal reference to grade against; and any public sample may already sit in a model's training set.