REVIEW 3 cited by
Generating High-Precision Feedback for Programming Syntax Errors using Large Language Models
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
read the original abstract
Large language models (LLMs), such as Codex, hold great promise in enhancing programming education by automatically generating feedback for students. We investigate using LLMs to generate feedback for fixing syntax errors in Python programs, a key scenario in introductory programming. More concretely, given a student's buggy program, our goal is to generate feedback comprising a fixed program along with a natural language explanation describing the errors/fixes, inspired by how a human tutor would give feedback. While using LLMs is promising, the critical challenge is to ensure high precision in the generated feedback, which is imperative before deploying such technology in classrooms. The main research question we study is: Can we develop LLMs-based feedback generation techniques with a tunable precision parameter, giving educators quality control over the feedback that students receive? To this end, we introduce PyFiXV, our technique to generate high-precision feedback powered by Codex. The key idea behind PyFiXV is to use a novel run-time validation mechanism to decide whether the generated feedback is suitable for sharing with the student; notably, this validation mechanism also provides a precision knob to educators. We perform an extensive evaluation using two real-world datasets of Python programs with syntax errors and show the efficacy of PyFiXV in generating high-precision feedback.
Forward citations
Cited by 3 Pith papers
-
Navigating Pitfalls: Evaluating LLMs in Machine Learning Programming Education
Across four LLMs, pitfall recall in machine-learning code averaged under 50%, with information-leakage and model-selection errors most often missed.
-
Narrowing the Gap: Supervised Fine-Tuning of Open-Source LLMs as a Viable Alternative to Proprietary Models for Pedagogical Tools
Fine-tuned open-source models, especially Qwen3-4B, explain C compiler errors at a quality close to GPT-4.1 on expert-judged metrics.
-
LLM Contribution Summarization in Software Projects
An LLM-based pipeline that auto-summarizes individual Git contributions was helpful to instructors and mostly accurate, but the evaluation was weak.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.