Quality Assessment of Prompts Used in Code Generation
2404.10155
0
0
🛸
Abstract
Large Language Models (LLMs) are gaining popularity among software engineers. A crucial aspect of developing effective code-generation LLMs is to evaluate these models using a robust benchmark. Evaluation benchmarks with quality issues can provide a false sense of performance. In this work, we conduct the first-of-its-kind study of the quality of prompts within benchmarks used to compare the performance of different code generation models. To conduct this study, we analyzed 3,566 prompts from 9 code generation benchmarks to identify quality issues in them. We also investigated whether fixing the identified quality issues in the benchmarks' prompts affects a model's performance. We also studied memorization issues of the evaluation dataset, which can put into question a benchmark's trustworthiness. We found that code generation evaluation benchmarks mainly focused on Python and coding exercises and had very limited contextual dependencies to challenge the model. These datasets and the developers' prompts suffer from quality issues like spelling and grammatical errors, unclear sentences to express developers' intent, and not using proper documentation style. Fixing all these issues in the benchmarks can lead to a better performance for Python code generation, but not a significant improvement was observed for Java code generation. We also found evidence that GPT-3.5-Turbo and CodeGen-2.5 models possibly have data contamination issues.
Create account to get full access
Overview
- This study examines the quality of prompts used in benchmarks to evaluate the performance of code generation language models.
- The researchers analyzed 3,566 prompts from 9 different code generation benchmarks to identify quality issues.
- They also investigated whether fixing these quality issues affected the models' performance and looked for signs of dataset memorization, which could impact a benchmark's trustworthiness.
Plain English Explanation
As large language models (LLMs) become more popular for generating code, it's crucial to have robust benchmarks to evaluate their performance. However, if the prompts used in these benchmarks have quality issues, it can give a false impression of the models' capabilities.
In this study, the researchers took a deep dive into the prompts used in 9 different code generation benchmarks, analyzing 3,566 of them to identify common problems. They found that many of the prompts had spelling and grammar errors, unclear instructions, and a lack of proper documentation style. These issues could make it harder for the models to understand what the developer is asking for.
The researchers then investigated whether fixing these quality issues in the prompts would affect the models' performance. They found that it did improve the results for Python code generation, but not as much for Java. This suggests that the benchmarks may be biased towards certain programming languages.
The researchers also looked for signs that the evaluation datasets might be contaminated, meaning the models had somehow "memorized" the data during training. This could also skew the benchmark results and make the models seem more capable than they really are.
Overall, this study highlights the importance of using high-quality prompts and datasets when evaluating code generation language models. By addressing these issues, researchers and developers can get a more accurate picture of how these models perform in real-world scenarios.
Technical Explanation
The researchers conducted a comprehensive analysis of the prompts used in 9 code generation benchmarks, comprising a total of 3,566 prompts. They systematically identified quality issues in these prompts, such as spelling and grammatical errors, unclear instructions, and a lack of proper documentation style.
To understand the impact of these quality issues, the researchers investigated whether fixing them would affect the performance of code generation models. They found that addressing the identified problems did lead to improved results for Python code generation, but not a significant improvement for Java code generation.
The researchers also explored the issue of dataset memorization, which could undermine the trustworthiness of a benchmark. They found evidence suggesting that the GPT-3.5-Turbo and CodeGen-2.5 models may have been affected by data contamination, potentially skewing the benchmark results.
These findings highlight the importance of using high-quality prompts and datasets when evaluating code generation language models. Benchmarks with quality issues can provide a false sense of performance, leading to inaccurate conclusions about the capabilities of these models.
The researchers' work aligns with other studies in the field, such as Code-Aware Prompting, Language Model Prompt Selection, Plug and Play Prompts, and Automatic Prompt Selection, which emphasize the crucial role of prompt design and dataset quality in the effective evaluation of code generation language models.
Critical Analysis
The researchers have provided a comprehensive and insightful analysis of the quality issues in code generation benchmarks. By identifying common problems with the prompts, they have highlighted a crucial aspect that can significantly impact the performance evaluation of these models.
However, the study is limited to a specific set of benchmarks and may not capture the full diversity of prompts and datasets used in the field. Additionally, the researchers acknowledged that the improvements seen in Python code generation after addressing the quality issues were not as pronounced for Java. This suggests that the benchmarks may have inherent biases towards certain programming languages, which warrants further investigation.
The researchers also raised concerns about potential dataset memorization issues, which could call into question the trustworthiness of the benchmarks. This is an important aspect that deserves further study, as it could have broader implications for the reliability of code generation model evaluation.
Overall, this study serves as a valuable contribution to the field, underscoring the need for rigorous and unbiased evaluation of code generation language models. By addressing the quality of prompts and datasets, researchers and developers can gain a more accurate understanding of the capabilities and limitations of these models, leading to more meaningful advancements in the field.
Conclusion
This study provides a comprehensive analysis of the quality of prompts used in benchmarks for evaluating code generation language models. The researchers found that many of the prompts in these benchmarks suffer from various quality issues, such as spelling and grammar errors, unclear instructions, and a lack of proper documentation style.
By addressing these quality issues, the researchers were able to observe improved performance for Python code generation, but not a significant improvement for Java. This suggests that the benchmarks may be biased towards certain programming languages, highlighting the need for more diverse and representative evaluation datasets.
The researchers also uncovered evidence of potential dataset memorization issues, which could undermine the trustworthiness of the benchmarks. This finding underscores the importance of carefully curating and validating the data used to evaluate these models.
Overall, this study emphasizes the critical role of prompt and dataset quality in the effective evaluation of code generation language models. By addressing these issues, researchers and developers can gain a more accurate understanding of the capabilities and limitations of these models, ultimately driving more meaningful progress in the field of code generation.
This summary was produced with help from an AI and may contain inaccuracies - check out the links to read the original source documents!
Related Papers
📉
CSEPrompts: A Benchmark of Introductory Computer Science Prompts
Nishat Raihan, Dhiman Goswami, Sadiya Sayara Chowdhury Puspo, Christian Newman, Tharindu Ranasinghe, Marcos Zampieri
0
0
Recent advances in AI, machine learning, and NLP have led to the development of a new generation of Large Language Models (LLMs) that are trained on massive amounts of data and often have trillions of parameters. Commercial applications (e.g., ChatGPT) have made this technology available to the general public, thus making it possible to use LLMs to produce high-quality texts for academic and professional purposes. Schools and universities are aware of the increasing use of AI-generated content by students and they have been researching the impact of this new technology and its potential misuse. Educational programs in Computer Science (CS) and related fields are particularly affected because LLMs are also capable of generating programming code in various programming languages. To help understand the potential impact of publicly available LLMs in CS education, we introduce CSEPrompts, a framework with hundreds of programming exercise prompts and multiple-choice questions retrieved from introductory CS and programming courses. We also provide experimental results on CSEPrompts to evaluate the performance of several LLMs with respect to generating Python code and answering basic computer science and programming questions.
4/5/2024
Code-Aware Prompting: A study of Coverage Guided Test Generation in Regression Setting using LLM
Gabriel Ryan, Siddhartha Jain, Mingyue Shang, Shiqi Wang, Xiaofei Ma, Murali Krishna Ramanathan, Baishakhi Ray
0
0
Testing plays a pivotal role in ensuring software quality, yet conventional Search Based Software Testing (SBST) methods often struggle with complex software units, achieving suboptimal test coverage. Recent works using large language models (LLMs) for test generation have focused on improving generation quality through optimizing the test generation context and correcting errors in model outputs, but use fixed prompting strategies that prompt the model to generate tests without additional guidance. As a result LLM-generated testsuites still suffer from low coverage. In this paper, we present SymPrompt, a code-aware prompting strategy for LLMs in test generation. SymPrompt's approach is based on recent work that demonstrates LLMs can solve more complex logical problems when prompted to reason about the problem in a multi-step fashion. We apply this methodology to test generation by deconstructing the testsuite generation process into a multi-stage sequence, each of which is driven by a specific prompt aligned with the execution paths of the method under test, and exposing relevant type and dependency focal context to the model. Our approach enables pretrained LLMs to generate more complete test cases without any additional training. We implement SymPrompt using the TreeSitter parsing framework and evaluate on a benchmark challenging methods from open source Python projects. SymPrompt enhances correct test generations by a factor of 5 and bolsters relative coverage by 26% for CodeGen2. Notably, when applied to GPT-4, SymPrompt improves coverage by over 2x compared to baseline prompting strategies.
4/4/2024
Hints-In-Browser: Benchmarking Language Models for Programming Feedback Generation
Nachiket Kotalwar, Alkis Gotovos, Adish Singla
0
0
Generative AI and large language models hold great promise in enhancing programming education by generating individualized feedback and hints for learners. Recent works have primarily focused on improving the quality of generated feedback to achieve human tutors' quality. While quality is an important performance criterion, it is not the only criterion to optimize for real-world educational deployments. In this paper, we benchmark language models for programming feedback generation across several performance criteria, including quality, cost, time, and data privacy. The key idea is to leverage recent advances in the new paradigm of in-browser inference that allow running these models directly in the browser, thereby providing direct benefits across cost and data privacy. To boost the feedback quality of small models compatible with in-browser inference engines, we develop a fine-tuning pipeline based on GPT-4 generated synthetic data. We showcase the efficacy of fine-tuned Llama3-8B and Phi3-3.8B 4-bit quantized models using WebLLM's in-browser inference engine on three different Python programming datasets. We will release the full implementation along with a web app and datasets to facilitate further research on in-browser language models.
6/10/2024
A Better LLM Evaluator for Text Generation: The Impact of Prompt Output Sequencing and Optimization
KuanChao Chu, Yi-Pei Chen, Hideki Nakayama
0
0
This research investigates prompt designs of evaluating generated texts using large language models (LLMs). While LLMs are increasingly used for scoring various inputs, creating effective prompts for open-ended text evaluation remains challenging due to model sensitivity and subjectivity in evaluation of text generation. Our study experimented with different prompt structures, altering the sequence of output instructions and including explanatory reasons. We found that the order of presenting reasons and scores significantly influences LLMs' scoring, with a different level of rule understanding in the prompt. An additional optimization may enhance scoring alignment if sufficient data is available. This insight is crucial for improving the accuracy and consistency of LLM-based evaluations.
6/17/2024