Do Large Code Models Understand Programming Concepts? Counterfactual Analysis for Code Predicates

February 08, 2024 Β· Declared Dead Β· πŸ› International Conference on Machine Learning

πŸ‘» CAUSE OF DEATH: Ghosted
No code link whatsoever

"No code URL or promise found in abstract"

Evidence collected by the PWNC Scanner

Authors Ashish Hooda, Mihai Christodorescu, Miltiadis Allamanis, Aaron Wilson, Kassem Fawaz, Somesh Jha arXiv ID 2402.05980 Category cs.SE: Software Engineering Cross-listed cs.AI, cs.LG, cs.PL Citations 15 Venue International Conference on Machine Learning Last Checked 4 months ago
Abstract
Large Language Models' success on text generation has also made them better at code generation and coding tasks. While a lot of work has demonstrated their remarkable performance on tasks such as code completion and editing, it is still unclear as to why. We help bridge this gap by exploring to what degree auto-regressive models understand the logical constructs of the underlying programs. We propose Counterfactual Analysis for Programming Concept Predicates (CACP) as a counterfactual testing framework to evaluate whether Large Code Models understand programming concepts. With only black-box access to the model, we use CACP to evaluate ten popular Large Code Models for four different programming concepts. Our findings suggest that current models lack understanding of concepts such as data flow and control flow.
Community shame:
Not yet rated
Community Contributions

Found the code? Know the venue? Think something is wrong? Let us know!

πŸ“œ Similar Papers

In the same crypt β€” Software Engineering

Died the same way β€” πŸ‘» Ghosted