Md Faizul Ibne Amin

Atsushi Shirafuji, Md. Mostafizer Rahman, Md Faizul Ibne Amin et al.

Programmers often struggle to identify and fix bugs in their programs. In recent years, many language models (LMs) have been proposed to fix erroneous programs and support error recovery. However, the LMs tend to generate solutions that differ from the original input programs. This leads to potential comprehension difficulties for users. In this paper, we propose an approach to suggest a correct program with minimal repair edits using CodeT5. We fine-tune a pre-trained CodeT5 on code pairs of wrong and correct programs and evaluate its performance with several baseline models. The experimental results show that the fine-tuned CodeT5 achieves a pass@100 of 91.95% and an average edit distance of the most similar correct program of 6.84, which indicates that at least one correct program can be suggested by generating 100 candidate programs. We demonstrate the effectiveness of LMs in suggesting program repair with minimal edits for solving introductory programming problems.

Md Mostafizer Rahman, Ariful Islam Shiplu, Yutaka Watanobe et al.

Contextual embeddings generated by LLMs exhibit strong positional inductive biases, which can limit their ability to fully capture long-range, order-sensitive dependencies in highly structured source code. Consequently, how to further refine and enhance LLM embeddings for improved code understanding remains an open research question. To address this gap, we propose a hybrid LLM-RNN framework that reinforces LLM-generated contextual embeddings with a sequential RNN architecture. The embeddings reprocessing step aims to reinforce sequential semantics and strengthen order-aware dependencies inherent in source code. We evaluate the proposed hybrid models on both benchmark and real-world coding datasets. The experimental results show that the RoBERTa-BiGRU and CodeBERT-GRU models achieved accuracies of 66.40% and 66.03%, respectively, on the defect detection benchmark dataset, representing improvements of approximately 5.35% and 3.95% over the standalone RoBERTa and CodeBERT models. Furthermore, the CodeT5-GRU and CodeT5+-BiGRU models achieved accuracies of 67.90% and 67.79%, respectively, surpassing their base models and outperforming RoBERTa-BiGRU and CodeBERT-GRU by a notable margin. In addition, CodeT5-GRU model attains weighted and macro F1-scores of 67.18% and 67.00%, respectively, on the same dataset. Extensive experiments across three real-world datasets further demonstrate consistent and statistically significant improvements over standalone LLMs. Overall, our findings indicate that reprocessing contextual embeddings with RNN architectures enhances code understanding performance in LLM-based models.

Md Mostafizer Rahman, Ariful Islam Shiplu, Md Faizul Ibne Amin et al.

Pretrained Large Language Models (LLMs) have achieved remarkable success across diverse domains, with education and research emerging as particularly impactful areas. Among current state-of-the-art LLMs, ChatGPT and DeepSeek exhibit strong capabilities in mathematics, science, medicine, literature, and programming. In this study, we present a comprehensive evaluation of these two LLMs through background technology analysis, empirical experiments, and a real-world user survey. The evaluation explores trade-offs among model accuracy, computational efficiency, and user experience in educational and research affairs. We benchmarked these LLMs performance in text generation, programming, and specialized problem-solving. Experimental results show that ChatGPT excels in general language understanding and text generation, while DeepSeek demonstrates superior performance in programming tasks due to its efficiency-focused design. Moreover, both models deliver medically accurate diagnostic outputs and effectively solve complex mathematical problems. Complementing these quantitative findings, a survey of students, educators, and researchers highlights the practical benefits and limitations of these models, offering deeper insights into their role in advancing education and research.

Atsushi Shirafuji, Taku Matsumoto, Md Faizul Ibne Amin et al.

Finding and fixing errors is a time-consuming task not only for novice programmers but also for expert programmers. Prior work has identified frequent error patterns among various levels of programmers. However, the differences in the tendencies between novices and experts have yet to be revealed. From the knowledge of the frequent errors in each level of programmers, instructors will be able to provide helpful advice for each level of learners. In this paper, we propose a rule-based error classification tool to classify errors in code pairs consisting of wrong and correct programs. We classify errors for 95,631 code pairs and identify 3.47 errors on average, which are submitted by various levels of programmers on an online judge system. The classified errors are used to analyze the differences in frequent errors between novice and expert programmers. The analyzed results show that, as for the same introductory problems, errors made by novices are due to the lack of knowledge in programming, and the mistakes are considered an essential part of the learning process. On the other hand, errors made by experts are due to misunderstandings caused by the carelessness of reading problems or the challenges of solving problems differently than usual. The proposed tool can be used to create error-labeled datasets and for further code-related educational research.

Md Faizul Ibne Amin, Yutaka Watanobe, Md. Mostafizer Rahman et al.

Programming is a core skill in computer science and software engineering (SE), yet identifying and resolving code errors remains challenging for both novice and experienced developers. While Large Language Models (LLMs) have shown remarkable capabilities in natural language understanding and generation tasks, their potential in domain-specific, complex scenarios, such as multi-label classification (MLC) of programming errors, remains underexplored. Recognizing this less-explored area, this study proposes a multi-label error classification (MLEC) framework for source code that leverages fine-tuned LLMs, including CodeT5-base, GraphCodeBERT, CodeT5+, UniXcoder, RoBERTa, PLBART, and CoTexT. These LLMs are integrated with deep learning (DL) architectures such as GRU, LSTM, BiLSTM, and BiLSTM with an additive attention mechanism (BiLSTM-A) to capture both syntactic and semantic features from a real-world student-written Python code error dataset. Extensive experiments across 32 model variants, optimized using Optuna-based hyperparameter tuning, have been evaluated using comprehensive multi-label metrics, including average accuracy, macro and weighted precision, recall, F1-score, exact match accuracy, One-error, Hamming loss, Jaccard similarity, and ROC-AUC (micro, macro, and weighted). Results show that the CodeT5+\_GRU model achieved the strongest performance, with a weighted F1-score of 0.8243, average accuracy of 91.84\%, exact match accuracy of 53.78\%, Hamming loss of 0.0816, and One error of 0.0708. These findings confirm the effectiveness of combining pretrained semantic encoders with efficient recurrent decoders. This work lays the foundation for developing intelligent, scalable tools for automated code feedback, with potential applications in programming education (PE) and broader SE domains.

Md Faizul Ibne Amin, Yutaka Watanobe, Daniel M. Muepu et al.

LLMs are increasingly employed both as judges for evaluating open-ended outputs and as co-creation partners in AI-assisted programming; yet rigorous evaluation in human-AI co-creation settings remains underdeveloped as judgments must be reliable, comparable across models, and interpretable over multi-turn interaction. To address this gap, a rubric-driven LLM-as-a-Judge framework is presented for contest-style human-AI co-creation in coding and software engineering (SE). The framework is built around schema-constrained judge outputs, validation and repair mechanisms, grouped and split by user and problem to prevent trajectory leakage, and participant-level NONBLIND context. Multiple LLM judges are assessed through a multi-metric protocol covering discrimination (ROC-AUC, PR-AUC), thresholded decision quality (MCC), probabilistic reliability (LogLoss, Brier score, ECE), and inter-judge agreement (Cohen's and Fleiss' k). Human-AI co-creation is further examined through trajectory-level signals, including turn-wise confidence, Success-at-Turn, time-to-success, revision churn, and CodeBLEU. Co-creation success is found to concentrate early, with Success-at-Turn rising to 0.8533 at the first observed turn and stabilizing at 0.8641 by turn 6. Revision behavior, however, remains heterogeneous, suggesting that productive progress can emerge through either incremental refinement or broader restructuring. On the judging side, the best held-out scores reach 0.5937 for ROC-AUC, 0.6904 for PR-AUC, and 0.5000 for MCC test, while inter-judge consistency remains modest overall (mean pairwise Cohen's k = 0.1592, Fleiss' k = 0.0696). Taken together, this work offers an auditable and reproducible evaluation methodology that links reliability-aware LLM judging with trajectory-based analysis of human-AI co-creation, providing a practical evaluation template for future AI-assisted coding and SE.