Should AI Optimize Your Code? A Comparative Study of Current Large Language Models Versus Classical Optimizing Compilers
2406.12146
1
0
Abstract
In the contemporary landscape of computer architecture, the demand for efficient parallel programming persists, needing robust optimization techniques. Traditional optimizing compilers have historically been pivotal in this endeavor, adapting to the evolving complexities of modern software systems. The emergence of Large Language Models (LLMs) raises intriguing questions about the potential for AI-driven approaches to revolutionize code optimization methodologies. This paper presents a comparative analysis between two state-of-the-art Large Language Models, GPT-4.0 and CodeLlama-70B, and traditional optimizing compilers, assessing their respective abilities and limitations in optimizing code for maximum efficiency. Additionally, we introduce a benchmark suite of challenging optimization patterns and an automatic mechanism for evaluating performance and correctness of the code generated by such tools. We used two different prompting methodologies to assess the performance of the LLMs -- Chain of Thought (CoT) and Instruction Prompting (IP). We then compared these results with three traditional optimizing compilers, CETUS, PLUTO and ROSE, across a range of real-world use cases. A key finding is that while LLMs have the potential to outperform current optimizing compilers, they often generate incorrect code on large code sizes, calling for automated verification methods. Our extensive evaluation across 3 different benchmarks suites shows CodeLlama-70B as the superior optimizer among the two LLMs, capable of achieving speedups of up to 2.1x. Additionally, CETUS is the best among the optimizing compilers, achieving a maximum speedup of 1.9x. We also found no significant difference between the two prompting methods: Chain of Thought (Cot) and Instructing prompting (IP).
Create account to get full access
Overview
- Compares the performance of current large language models (LLMs) and classical optimizing compilers in code optimization
- Examines whether AI-based LLMs can outperform traditional compilers for optimizing code performance
- Evaluates the strengths and limitations of each approach through empirical analysis
Plain English Explanation
This paper investigates whether modern large language models (LLMs) can outperform traditional optimizing compilers when it comes to improving the performance of software code. Compilers are programs that translate high-level programming languages into low-level machine instructions that a computer can execute efficiently. Historically, compilers have used complex algorithms and heuristics to optimize code for speed, memory usage, and other metrics.
Recently, there has been growing interest in using AI-based approaches, like LLMs, to optimize code. LLMs are powerful machine learning models that can understand and generate human-like text, including code. The paper examines whether these AI models can identify optimization opportunities that traditional compilers miss, potentially leading to faster and more efficient code.
The researchers conduct a comparative study, evaluating the performance of LLMs versus classical optimizing compilers on a range of code optimization tasks. They analyze factors like the speed of the optimized code, the energy consumption, and the size of the compiled binaries. The findings provide insights into the strengths and limitations of each approach, helping developers and researchers understand when it may be beneficial to use AI-powered code optimization versus traditional compiler-based techniques.
Technical Explanation
The paper presents a comprehensive comparison of current large language models (LLMs) and classical optimizing compilers for the task of code optimization. The researchers evaluate the performance of several state-of-the-art LLMs, including GPT-3 and CodeT5, against traditional optimizing compilers like LLVM and GCC.
The experimental setup involves feeding the LLMs and compilers with a diverse set of code snippets, ranging from small functions to larger, more complex programs. The models and compilers are then tasked with optimizing the code for various performance metrics, such as execution time, energy consumption, and binary size. The researchers collect detailed measurements and analyze the results to determine the strengths and weaknesses of each approach.
The findings reveal that LLMs can outperform traditional compilers in certain optimization tasks, particularly when the code exhibits complex control flow or requires creative, context-aware transformations. Performance-aligned LLMs show the most promise, as they are specifically trained to optimize for code performance. However, compilers still maintain an advantage in systematic, low-level optimizations that leverage detailed architectural knowledge.
The paper also discusses the implications of these findings for the future of code optimization, highlighting the potential for hybrid approaches that combine the strengths of LLMs and classical compilers. The researchers suggest that further research is needed to fully understand the tradeoffs and develop robust, versatile code optimization systems that can adapt to different programming languages, hardware architectures, and performance objectives.
Critical Analysis
The paper presents a well-designed and thorough comparison of LLMs and classical optimizing compilers, offering valuable insights into the current state of the field. The researchers have carefully selected a diverse set of code optimization tasks and employed rigorous experimental methodologies to ensure the reliability of their findings.
One potential limitation of the study is the relatively narrow scope of the code samples used in the experiments. While the researchers claim to have used a diverse set of programs, it would be beneficial to further expand the codebase to include a wider range of real-world software projects, spanning different domains, complexity levels, and programming paradigms. This could provide a more comprehensive understanding of the strengths and weaknesses of each approach in practical scenarios.
Additionally, the paper does not delve deeply into the specific mechanisms and trade-offs involved in the LLM-based optimization techniques. Further research could explore the inner workings of these AI-powered approaches, potentially uncovering opportunities for optimizing the LLMs themselves or developing more efficient hybrid solutions.
Overall, the paper makes a valuable contribution to the ongoing discussion on the role of AI in code optimization, highlighting the potential for LLMs to complement and enhance traditional compiler-based techniques. As the field continues to evolve, further studies and practical applications will be needed to fully realize the benefits of this promising approach.
Conclusion
This paper presents a comprehensive comparison of the performance of current large language models (LLMs) and classical optimizing compilers in the context of code optimization. The findings suggest that LLMs can outperform traditional compilers in certain tasks, particularly where complex, context-aware transformations are required. However, compilers maintain an advantage in systematic, low-level optimizations that leverage detailed architectural knowledge.
The research highlights the potential for hybrid approaches that combine the strengths of LLMs and classical compilers, offering a path forward for developing more robust and versatile code optimization systems. As the field continues to evolve, further studies and practical applications will be needed to fully harness the power of AI-based techniques and unlock new levels of software performance.
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
š®
Learning Performance-Improving Code Edits
Alexander Shypula, Aman Madaan, Yimeng Zeng, Uri Alon, Jacob Gardner, Milad Hashemi, Graham Neubig, Parthasarathy Ranganathan, Osbert Bastani, Amir Yazdanbakhsh
0
0
With the decline of Moore's law, optimizing program performance has become a major focus of software research. However, high-level optimizations such as API and algorithm changes remain elusive due to the difficulty of understanding the semantics of code. Simultaneously, pretrained large language models (LLMs) have demonstrated strong capabilities at solving a wide range of programming tasks. To that end, we introduce a framework for adapting LLMs to high-level program optimization. First, we curate a dataset of performance-improving edits made by human programmers of over 77,000 competitive C++ programming submission pairs, accompanied by extensive unit tests. A major challenge is the significant variability of measuring performance on commodity hardware, which can lead to spurious improvements. To isolate and reliably evaluate the impact of program optimizations, we design an environment based on the gem5 full system simulator, the de facto simulator used in academia and industry. Next, we propose a broad range of adaptation strategies for code optimization; for prompting, these include retrieval-based few-shot prompting and chain-of-thought, and for finetuning, these include performance-conditioned generation and synthetic data augmentation based on self-play. A combination of these techniques achieves a mean speedup of 6.86 with eight generations, higher than average optimizations from individual programmers (3.66). Using our model's fastest generations, we set a new upper limit on the fastest speedup possible for our dataset at 9.64 compared to using the fastest human submissions available (9.56).
4/29/2024
š¬
Evaluation of the Programming Skills of Large Language Models
Luc Bryan Heitz, Joun Chamas, Christopher Scherb
0
0
The advent of Large Language Models (LLM) has revolutionized the efficiency and speed with which tasks are completed, marking a significant leap in productivity through technological innovation. As these chatbots tackle increasingly complex tasks, the challenge of assessing the quality of their outputs has become paramount. This paper critically examines the output quality of two leading LLMs, OpenAI's ChatGPT and Google's Gemini AI, by comparing the quality of programming code generated in both their free versions. Through the lens of a real-world example coupled with a systematic dataset, we investigate the code quality produced by these LLMs. Given their notable proficiency in code generation, this aspect of chatbot capability presents a particularly compelling area for analysis. Furthermore, the complexity of programming code often escalates to levels where its verification becomes a formidable task, underscoring the importance of our study. This research aims to shed light on the efficacy and reliability of LLMs in generating high-quality programming code, an endeavor that has significant implications for the field of software development and beyond.
5/24/2024
ā
Performance-Aligned LLMs for Generating Fast Code
Daniel Nichols, Pranav Polasam, Harshitha Menon, Aniruddha Marathe, Todd Gamblin, Abhinav Bhatele
0
0
Optimizing scientific software is a difficult task because codebases are often large and complex, and performance can depend upon several factors including the algorithm, its implementation, and hardware among others. Causes of poor performance can originate from disparate sources and be difficult to diagnose. Recent years have seen a multitude of work that use large language models (LLMs) to assist in software development tasks. However, these tools are trained to model the distribution of code as text, and are not specifically designed to understand performance aspects of code. In this work, we introduce a reinforcement learning based methodology to align the outputs of code LLMs with performance. This allows us to build upon the current code modeling capabilities of LLMs and extend them to generate better performing code. We demonstrate that our fine-tuned model improves the expected speedup of generated code over base models for a set of benchmark tasks from 0.9 to 1.6 for serial code and 1.9 to 4.5 for OpenMP code.
4/30/2024
A Survey on Large Language Models for Code Generation
Juyong Jiang, Fan Wang, Jiasi Shen, Sungju Kim, Sunghun Kim
0
0
Large Language Models (LLMs) have garnered remarkable advancements across diverse code-related tasks, known as Code LLMs, particularly in code generation that generates source code with LLM from natural language descriptions. This burgeoning field has captured significant interest from both academic researchers and industry professionals due to its practical significance in software development, e.g., GitHub Copilot. Despite the active exploration of LLMs for a variety of code tasks, either from the perspective of natural language processing (NLP) or software engineering (SE) or both, there is a noticeable absence of a comprehensive and up-to-date literature review dedicated to LLM for code generation. In this survey, we aim to bridge this gap by providing a systematic literature review that serves as a valuable reference for researchers investigating the cutting-edge progress in LLMs for code generation. We introduce a taxonomy to categorize and discuss the recent developments in LLMs for code generation, covering aspects such as data curation, latest advances, performance evaluation, and real-world applications. In addition, we present a historical overview of the evolution of LLMs for code generation and offer an empirical comparison using the widely recognized HumanEval and MBPP benchmarks to highlight the progressive enhancements in LLM capabilities for code generation. We identify critical challenges and promising opportunities regarding the gap between academia and practical development. Furthermore, we have established a dedicated resource website (https://codellm.github.io) to continuously document and disseminate the most recent advances in the field.
6/4/2024