CRScore: Grounding Automated Evaluation of Code Review Comments in Code Claims and Smells

September 29, 2024 Β· Declared Dead Β· πŸ› North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics

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

"No code URL or promise found in abstract"

Evidence collected by the PWNC Scanner

Authors Atharva Naik, Marcus Alenius, Daniel Fried, Carolyn Rose arXiv ID 2409.19801 Category cs.SE: Software Engineering Cross-listed cs.AI, cs.CL Citations 5 Venue North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics Last Checked 4 months ago
Abstract
The task of automated code review has recently gained a lot of attention from the machine learning community. However, current review comment evaluation metrics rely on comparisons with a human-written reference for a given code change (also called a diff). Furthermore, code review is a one-to-many problem, like generation and summarization, with many "valid reviews" for a diff. Thus, we develop CRScore - a reference-free metric to measure dimensions of review quality like conciseness, comprehensiveness, and relevance. We design CRScore to evaluate reviews in a way that is grounded in claims and potential issues detected in the code by LLMs and static analyzers. We demonstrate that CRScore can produce valid, fine-grained scores of review quality that have the greatest alignment with human judgment among open source metrics (0.54 Spearman correlation) and are more sensitive than reference-based metrics. We also release a corpus of 2.9k human-annotated review quality scores for machine-generated and GitHub review comments to support the development of automated metrics.
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