The paper introduces AXIOM, a perturbation-based framework for creating a balanced benchmark of code evaluation problems. AXIOM refines program quality by applying controlled semantic perturbations and then calibrates scores through selective manual annotation, resulting in the multilingual AXIOMBENCH dataset with 1,962 problems. This approach addresses limitations of prior benchmarks that rely on coarse binary labels or subjective human scoring.
arXiv:2506. 11066v3 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Code retrieval is essential in modern software development, as it boosts code reuse and accelerates debugging.
arXiv:2606. 28998v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large Language Model (LLM) alignment trains an LLM using preference data to produce outputs that better meet established quality standards.
arXiv:2601. 02430v3 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Web applications (web apps) have become a key arena for large language models (LLMs) to demonstrate their code generation capabilities and commercial potential.
Litmus is a zero-label system that automatically designs evaluation and monitoring metrics for AI pipelines by extracting evaluation intent from source code and targeted interrogation. It identifies what must be measured and why, then generates a justified, per-stage metric portfolio. In experiments on three real code-defined pipelines, Litmus outperforms AutoMetrics and DynamicRubric baselines in concern coverage, stage span, redundancy, and validity against per-row quality labels, especially on scientific QA.
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.
The paper introduces SWE-Flux, a repository‑level benchmark designed to test large language models’ ability to reason about runtime behavior. It contains 480 execution‑grounded instances from 12 real Python repositories, with gold answers automatically harvested from instrumented test executions. Evaluation of five LLMs shows the task remains difficult, with the best model achieving only 37% accuracy, and the benchmark can generate challenging variants through input perturbation.
arXiv:2604. 01527v4 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Production deployment of AI coding agents requires fast, reproducible evaluation signals.
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.
arXiv:2507. 22580v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Automated Program Repair (APR) seeks to automatically correct software bugs without requiring human intervention.
arXiv:2608. 13566v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Post-training papers, model cards, and blog posts often treat scores on a small set of coding benchmarks (e.
The paper introduces MCR-Bench, a benchmark for realistic multi‑round code review that includes 2,269 real‑world tasks across five programming languages, each annotated with fine‑grained defect information and dynamic state labels. Experiments with mainstream large language models show limited overall performance, especially as interaction rounds increase, and reveal that model accuracy varies by defect type and severity. Error analysis identifies key failure mechanisms such as cross‑round temporal misalignment and insufficient long‑range memory.
arXiv:2512. 22827v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Code often suffers from performance bugs.