Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 cited by

NaturalCodeBench: Examining Coding Performance Mismatch on HumanEval and Natural User Prompts

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 2405.04520 v1 pith:VFGX3NM5 submitted 2024-05-07 cs.CL cs.LGcs.SE

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

Large language models (LLMs) have manifested strong ability to generate codes for productive activities. However, current benchmarks for code synthesis, such as HumanEval, MBPP, and DS-1000, are predominantly oriented towards introductory tasks on algorithm and data science, insufficiently satisfying challenging requirements prevalent in real-world coding. To fill this gap, we propose NaturalCodeBench (NCB), a challenging code benchmark designed to mirror the complexity and variety of scenarios in real coding tasks. NCB comprises 402 high-quality problems in Python and Java, meticulously selected from natural user queries from online coding services, covering 6 different domains. Noting the extraordinary difficulty in creating testing cases for real-world queries, we also introduce a semi-automated pipeline to enhance the efficiency of test case construction. Comparing with manual solutions, it achieves an efficiency increase of more than 4 times. Our systematic experiments on 39 LLMs find that performance gaps on NCB between models with close HumanEval scores could still be significant, indicating a lack of focus on practical code synthesis scenarios or over-specified optimization on HumanEval. On the other hand, even the best-performing GPT-4 is still far from satisfying on NCB. The evaluation toolkit and development set are available at https://github.com/THUDM/NaturalCodeBench.

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 3 Pith papers

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

  1. AutoCodeBench: Large Language Models are Automatic Code Benchmark Generators

    cs.CL 2025-08 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    AutoCodeBench is an LLM-generated, sandbox-verified code benchmark with 3,920 problems across 20 languages, where top models reach only 52.4% pass@1.

  2. IFEvalCode: Controlled Code Generation

    cs.CL 2025-07 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    A 1,620-sample, 8-language, Chinese/English benchmark separates code correctness from instruction-following and shows instruction compliance is far lower than correctness across 40+ LLMs.

  3. Seed-Coder: Let the Code Model Curate Data for Itself

    cs.CL 2025-06 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    Seed-Coder shows that an LLM-trained quality scorer can filter 6T tokens of code data and yield 8B models that outperform similar-size open code models.

Pith tools