Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 cited by

CodeScore: Evaluating Code Generation by Learning Code Execution

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2301.09043 v4 pith:B7CETGZP submitted 2023-01-22 cs.SE

classification cs.SE
keywords codeinputcodescorefunctionalgenerationcemsevaluationformats
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

A proper code evaluation metric (CEM) profoundly impacts the evolution of code generation, which is an important research field in NLP and software engineering. Prevailing match-based CEMs (e.g., BLEU, Accuracy, and CodeBLEU) suffer from two significant drawbacks. 1. They primarily measure the surface differences between codes without considering their functional equivalence. However, functional equivalence is pivotal in evaluating the effectiveness of code generation, as different codes can perform identical operations. 2. They are predominantly designed for the Ref-only input format. However, code evaluation necessitates versatility in input formats. Aside from Ref-only, there are NL-only and Ref\&NL formats, which existing match-based CEMs cannot effectively accommodate. In this paper, we propose CodeScore, a large language model (LLM)-based CEM, which estimates the functional correctness of generated code on three input types. To acquire CodeScore, we present UniCE, a unified code generation learning framework, for LLMs to learn code execution (i.e., learning PassRatio and Executability of generated code) with unified input. Extensive experimental results on multiple code evaluation datasets demonstrate that CodeScore absolutely improves up to 58.87% correlation with functional correctness compared to other CEMs, achieves state-of-the-art performance, and effectively handles three input formats.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 4 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Rethinking the Capability of Fine-Tuned Language Models for Automated Vulnerability Repair

    cs.SE 2025-12 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    Fine-tuned AVR models memorize overlapping training data, so reported repair rates fall from ~20% to ~5% on non-overlapping splits, and match-based metrics misjudge true fixes.

  2. MRG-Bench: Evaluating and Exploring the Requirements of Context for Repository-Level Code Generation

    cs.SE 2025-08 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    MRG-Bench is a multi-language, executable repository-level code generation benchmark on which current LLMs and RAG methods perform poorly, with the dominant failure mode being poor understanding of user requirements.

  3. CoCoTen: Detecting Adversarial Inputs to Large Language Models through Latent Space Features of Contextual Co-occurrence Tensors

    cs.CL 2025-08 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    MRG-Bench is a multi-language, runnable-test benchmark showing that LLMs' main failure in repository-level code generation is understanding user requirements.

  4. OIBench: Benchmarking Strong Reasoning Models with Olympiad in Informatics

    cs.AI 2025-06 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    A private, contamination-resistant benchmark of 250 olympiad-level programming problems shows top reasoning models reaching about 36% solve rates, far above conventional models.

Pith tools