Fetching the paper…
Reading the bibliography…
Rapid advances in the field of Large Language Models (LLMs) have made LLM-based code generation an important area for investigation.
G. Katz, C. Barrett, D. L. Dill, K. Julian, and M. J. Kochenderfer, “Reluplex: An efficient smt solver for verifying deep neural networks,” in International Conference on Computer Aided Verification . Springer, 2017, pp. 97–117
2017
Earlier work this paper cites.
T. Gehr, M. Mirman, D. Drachsler-Cohen, P. Tsankov, S. Chaudhuri, and M. Vechev, “Ai2: Safety and robustness certification of neural networks with abstract interpretation,” in 2018 IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy (SP) . IEEE, 2018, pp. 3–18
2018
Earlier work this paper cites.
R. Bunel, I. Turkaslan, P. H. Torr, P. Kohli, and M. P. Kumar, “Piecewise linear neural networks verification: A comparative study,” 2018
2018
Earlier work this paper cites.
Y. Sun, M. Wu, W. Ruan, X. Huang, M. Kwiatkowska, and D. Kroening, “Concolic testing for deep neural networks,” in Proceedings of the 33rd ACM/IEEE International Conference on Automated Software Engineering , 2018, pp. 109–119
2018
Earlier work this paper cites.
G. Singh, T. Gehr, M. Mirman, M. Püschel, and M. T. Vechev, “Fast and effective robustness certification,” NeurIPS , vol. 1, no. 4, p. 6, 2018
2018
Earlier work this paper cites.
S. Wang, K. Pei, J. Whitehouse, J. Yang, and S. Jana, “Formal security analysis of neural networks using symbolic intervals,” in 27th { \{ USENIX } \} Security Symposium ( { \{ USENIX } \} Security 18) , 2018, pp. 1599–1614
2018
Earlier work this paper cites.
G. Katz, D. A. Huang, D. Ibeling, K. Julian, C. Lazarus, R. Lim, P. Shah, S. Thakoor, H. Wu, A. Zeljić et al. , “The marabou framework for verification and analysis of deep neural networks,” in International Conference on Computer Aided Verification . Springer, 2019, pp. 443–452
2019
Earlier work this paper cites.
W. Lin, Z. Yang, X. Chen, Q. Zhao, X. Li, Z. Liu, and J. He, “Robustness verification of classification deep neural networks via linear programming,” in Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition , 2019, pp. 11 418–11 427
2019
Earlier work this paper cites.
G. Singh, T. Gehr, M. Püschel, and M. Vechev, “An abstract domain for certifying neural networks,” Proceedings of the ACM on Programming Languages , vol. 3, no. POPL, pp. 1–30, 2019
2019
Earlier work this paper cites.
X. Xie, L. Ma, F. Juefei-Xu, M. Xue, H. Chen, Y. Liu, J. Zhao, B. Li, J. Yin, and S. See, “Deephunter: a coverage-guided fuzz testing framework for deep neural networks,” in Proceedings of the 28th ACM SIGSOFT International Symposium on Software Testing and Analysis , 2019, pp. 146–157
2019
Earlier work this paper cites.
R. Bunel, P. Mudigonda, I. Turkaslan, P. Torr, J. Lu, and P. Kohli, “Branch and bound for piecewise linear neural network verification,” Journal of Machine Learning Research , vol. 21, no. 2020, 2020
2020
Earlier work this paper cites.
2020
Earlier work this paper cites.
2021
Earlier work this paper cites.
T. Baluta, Z. L. Chua, K. S. Meel, and P. Saxena, “Scalable quantitative verification for deep neural networks,” in 2021 IEEE/ACM 43rd International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE) . IEEE, 2021, pp. 312–323
2021
Earlier work this paper cites.
2021
Earlier work this paper cites.
Y. Li, D. Choi, J. Chung, N. Kushman, J. Schrittwieser, R. Leblond, T. Eccles, J. Keeling, F. Gimeno, A. Dal Lago et al. , “Competition-level code generation with alphacode,” Science , vol. 378, no. 6624, pp. 1092–1097, 2022
2022
Earlier work this paper cites.
2022
Cited alongside, same era.
F. F. Xu, U. Alon, G. Neubig, and V. J. Hellendoorn, “A systematic evaluation of large language models of code,” in Proceedings of the 6th ACM SIGPLAN International Symposium on Machine Programming , 2022, pp. 1–10
2022
Cited alongside, same era.
E. Jiang, E. Toh, A. Molina, K. Olson, C. Kayacik, A. Donsbach, C. J. Cai, and M. Terry, “Discovering the syntax and strategies of natural language programming with generative language models,” in Proceedings of the 2022 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems , 2022, pp. 1–19
2022
Cited alongside, same era.
2023
Later among the works it cites.
J. Li, Y. Li, G. Li, Z. Jin, Y. Hao, and X. Hu, “Skcoder: A sketch-based approach for automatic code generation,” in 2023 IEEE/ACM 45th International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE) . IEEE, 2023, pp. 2124–2135
2023
Later among the works it cites.
2023
Later among the works it cites.
2023
Later among the works it cites.
alphaXiv searches the wider corpus for related work and actual follow-ups.
alphaXiv is searching for related work…
2022
Cited alongside, same era.
2023
Cited alongside, same era.
G. L. Scoccia, “Exploring early adopters’ perceptions of chatgpt as a code generation tool,” in 2023 38th IEEE/ACM International Conference on Automated Software Engineering Workshops (ASEW) . IEEE, 2023, pp. 88–93
2023
Cited alongside, same era.
A. Kashefi and T. Mukerji, “Chatgpt for programming numerical methods,” Journal of Machine Learning for Modeling and Computing , vol. 4, no. 2, 2023
2023
Cited alongside, same era.
2023
Cited alongside, same era.
C. Liu, B. Xuanlin, H. Zhang, N. Zhang, H. Hu, X. Zhang, and M. Yan, “Improving chatgpt prompt for code generation,” 05 2023
2023
Cited alongside, same era.
S. Ouyang, J. Zhang, M. Harman, and M. Wang, “Llm is like a box of chocolates: the non-determinism of chatgpt in code generation,” 08 2023
2023
Cited alongside, same era.
A. Buscemi, “A comparative study of code generation using chatgpt 3.5 across 10 programming languages,” 08 2023
2023
Cited alongside, same era.
2023
Cited alongside, same era.
2023
Later among the works it cites.
2023
Later among the works it cites.
A. Borji, “A categorical archive of chatgpt failures,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2302.03494 , 2023
2023
Later among the works it cites.
2023
Later among the works it cites.
A. Mastropaolo, L. Pascarella, E. Guglielmi, M. Ciniselli, S. Scalabrino, R. Oliveto, and G. Bavota, “On the robustness of code generation techniques: An empirical study on github copilot,” 02 2023
2023
Later among the works it cites.
C. Tsigkanos, P. Rani, S. Müller, and T. Kehrer, “Large language models: The next frontier for variable discovery within metamorphic testing?” in 2023 IEEE International Conference on Software Analysis, Evolution and Reengineering (SANER) . IEEE, 2023, pp. 678–682
2023
Later among the works it cites.
M. Liu, J. Wang, T. Lin, Q. Ma, Z. Fang, and Y. Wu, “An empirical study of the code generation of safety-critical software using llms,” Applied Sciences , vol. 14, no. 3, p. 1046, 2024
2024
Closest in time.
“gcc,” https://gcc.gnu.org/ , accessed: 2024-03-22
2024
Closest in time.
“sympy,” https://www.sympy.org/en/index.html , accessed: 2024-03-22
2024
Closest in time.
OpenAI, J. Achiam, S. Adler, S. Agarwal, L. Ahmad, I. Akkaya, F. L. Aleman, D. Almeida, J. Altenschmidt, S. Altman, and et al., “Gpt-4 technical report,” 2024
2024
Closest in time.
T. Dinh, J. Zhao, S. Tan, R. Negrinho, L. Lausen, S. Zha, and G. Karypis, “Large language models of code fail at completing code with potential bugs,” Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems , vol. 36, 2024
2024
Closest in time.