Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 cited by

MonoCoder: Domain-Specific Code Language Model for HPC Codes and Tasks

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 2312.13322 v3 pith:JE7SWHCB submitted 2023-12-20 cs.PL cs.AIcs.LGcs.SE

classification cs.PLcs.AIcs.LGcs.SE
keywords llmsmonocodertasksexistingcodehpc-specificlanguagelanguages
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

With easier access to powerful compute resources, there is a growing trend in AI for software development to develop large language models (LLMs) to address a variety of programming tasks. Even LLMs applied to tasks from the high-performance computing (HPC) domain are huge in size and demand expensive compute resources for training. This is partly because LLMs for HPC tasks are obtained by finetuning existing LLMs that support several natural and/or programming languages. We found this design choice confusing - why do we need LLMs trained on natural languages and programming languages unrelated to HPC for HPC-specific tasks? In this line of work, we aim to question choices made by existing LLMs by developing smaller language models (LMs) for specific domains - we call them domain-specific LMs. Specifically, we start with HPC as a domain and build an HPC-specific LM, named MonoCoder, which is orders of magnitude smaller than existing LMs but delivers better performance on non-HPC and HPC codes. Specifically, we pre-trained MonoCoder on an HPC-specific dataset (named HPCorpus) of C and C++ programs mined from GitHub. We evaluated the performance of MonoCoder against state-of-the-art multi-lingual LLMs. Results demonstrate that MonoCoder, although much smaller than existing LMs, outperforms other LLMs on normalized-perplexity tests (in relation to model size) while also delivering competing CodeBLEU scores for high-performance and parallel code generations. In other words, results suggest that MonoCoder understands HPC code better than state-of-the-art LLMs.

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 2 Pith papers

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

  1. Accelerating Latency-Critical Applications with AI-Powered Semi-Automatic Fine-Grained Parallelization on SMT Processors

    cs.DC 2025-08 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    An LLM-agent pipeline with profiling, binary analysis, and SMT simulation automatically parallelizes latency-critical benchmarks via the Relic framework, reporting a 17% geomean gain after excluding failures.

  2. Performance Evaluation of General Purpose Large Language Models for Basic Linear Algebra Subprograms Code Generation

    cs.LG 2025-07 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    GPT-4.1 and o4-mini can generate correct plain BLAS C code for most of 20 routines from routine names alone, but optimized generations fail often and performance claims rest on best-of-10 selection with no error bars.

Pith tools