REVIEW 5 cited by
Beyond Correctness: Benchmarking Multi-dimensional Code Generation for 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
In recent years, researchers have proposed numerous benchmarks to evaluate the impressive coding capabilities of large language models (LLMs). However, current benchmarks primarily assess the accuracy of LLM-generated code, while neglecting other critical dimensions that also significantly impact code quality in real-world development. Moreover, relying exclusively on correctness as the guiding metric renders LLMs susceptible to data contamination. Therefore, this paper proposes the RACE benchmark, which comprehensively evaluates the quality of code generated by LLMs across 4 dimensions: Readability, mAintainability, Correctness, and Efficiency. Specifically, considering the demand-dependent nature of dimensions beyond correctness, we design various types of user requirements for each dimension to assess the model's ability to generate correct code that also meets user demands. We analyze 28 representative LLMs based on RACE and find that: 1) current correctness-centric benchmarks fail to capture the multifaceted requirements of code in real-world scenarios, while RACE provides a comprehensive evaluation that reveals the defects of LLMs across multiple dimensions; 2) the RACE benchmark serves as an effective tool for resisting the risk of data contamination; 3) even the most advanced code LLMs still encounter significant challenges in customized requirements involving complex instructions; 4) most LLMs exhibit an inherent preference for specific coding style. These findings highlight the need for a multidimensional evaluation of code LLMs, emphasizing metrics beyond correctness for real-world applications. Future efforts should aim to develop novel learning algorithms to enhance code generation under varied constraints and improve coverage and usability for diverse user needs.
Forward citations
Cited by 5 Pith papers
-
From Execution to Education: A Bloom-Aligned Framework for Measuring Educational Control in LLMs
On 2,520 programming tasks, matched Qwen general and coder models reliably raise Bloom cognitive demand but fail to lower it, so execution skill does not imply educational control.
-
CodeAssay: A Multi-Metric Benchmark with Audited Ground Truth for LLM Code Generation
CodeAssay is a 185-task Python benchmark showing that auditing benchmark ground truth flips 9% of model correctness labels and widens measured model spread, and that a security-focused prompt costs code size and compl...
-
OIBench: Benchmarking Strong Reasoning Models with Olympiad in Informatics
A private, contamination-resistant benchmark of 250 olympiad-level programming problems shows top reasoning models reaching about 36% solve rates, far above conventional models.
-
A Causal Perspective on Measuring, Explaining and Mitigating Smells in LLM-Generated Code
A probabilistic score of code-smell propensity in LLM output is validated, used in a causal analysis, and shown to drop when prompts explicitly discourage known smells.
-
Static Analysis as a Feedback Loop: Enhancing LLM-Generated Code Beyond Correctness
Feeding static-analysis warnings back to GPT-4o over ten iterations cut security issues from over 40% to about 13%, readability issues from over 80% to about 11%, and reliability warnings from over 50% to about 11%.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.