Tanghaoran Zhang

Tanghaoran Zhang, Xinjun Mao, Shangwen Wang et al.

Recent advancements in large language models (LLMs) have automated various software engineering tasks, with benchmarks emerging to evaluate their capabilities. However, for adaptation, a critical activity during code reuse, there is no benchmark to assess LLMs' performance, leaving their practical utility in this area unclear. To fill this gap, we propose AdaptEval, a benchmark designed to evaluate LLMs on code snippet adaptation. Unlike existing benchmarks, AdaptEval incorporates the following three distinctive features: First, Practical Context. Tasks in AdaptEval are derived from developers' practices, preserving rich contextual information from Stack Overflow and GitHub communities. Second, Multi-granularity Annotation. Each task is annotated with requirements at both task and adaptation levels, supporting the evaluation of LLMs across diverse adaptation scenarios. Third, Fine-grained Evaluation. AdaptEval includes a two-tier testing framework combining adaptation-level and function-level tests, which enables evaluating LLMs' performance across various individual adaptations. Based on AdaptEval, we conduct the first empirical study to evaluate six instruction-tuned LLMs and especially three reasoning LLMs on code snippet adaptation. Experimental results demonstrate that AdaptEval enables the assessment of LLMs' adaptation capabilities from various perspectives. It also provides critical insights into their current limitations, particularly their struggle to follow explicit instructions. We hope AdaptEval can facilitate further investigation and enhancement of LLMs' capabilities in code snippet adaptation, supporting their real-world applications.

Tanghaoran Zhang, Yue Yu, Xinjun Mao et al.

Code snippet adaptation is a fundamental activity in the software development process. Unlike code generation, code snippet adaptation is not a "free creation", which requires developers to tailor a given code snippet in order to fit specific requirements and the code context. Recently, large language models (LLMs) have confirmed their effectiveness in the code generation task with promising results. However, their performance on adaptation, a reuse-oriented and context-dependent code change prediction task, is still unclear. To bridge this gap, we conduct an empirical study to investigate the performance and issues of LLMs on the adaptation task. We first evaluate the adaptation performances of three popular LLMs and compare them to the code generation task. Our result indicates that their adaptation ability is weaker than generation, with a nearly 15% decrease on pass@1 and more context-related errors. By manually inspecting 200 cases, we further investigate the causes of LLMs' sub-optimal performance, which can be classified into three categories, i.e., Unclear Requirement, Requirement Misalignment and Context Misapplication. Based on the above empirical research, we propose an interactive prompting approach to eliciting LLMs' adaptation ability. Experimental result reveals that our approach greatly improve LLMs' adaptation performance. The best-performing Human-LLM interaction successfully solves 159 out of the 202 identified defects and improves the pass@1 and pass@5 by over 40% compared to the initial instruction-based prompt. Considering human efforts, we suggest multi-agent interaction as a trade-off, which can achieve comparable performance with excellent generalization ability. We deem that our approach could provide methodological assistance for autonomous code snippet reuse and adaptation with LLMs.

Kang Yang, Xinjun Mao, Shangwen Wang et al.

Pre-trained code models rely heavily on high-quality pre-training data, particularly human-written reference comments that bridge code and natural language. However, these comments often become outdated as software evolves, degrading model performance. Large language models (LLMs) excel at generating high-quality code comments. We investigate whether replacing human-written comments with LLM-generated ones improves pre-training datasets. Since standard metrics cannot assess reference comment quality, we propose two novel reference-free evaluation tasks: code-comment inconsistency detection and semantic code search. Results show that LLM-generated comments are more semantically consistent with code than human-written ones, as confirmed by manual evaluation. Leveraging this finding, we rebuild the CodeSearchNet dataset with LLM-generated comments and re-pre-train CodeT5. Evaluations demonstrate that models trained on LLM-enhanced data outperform those using original human comments in code summarization, generation, and translation tasks. This work validates rebuilding pre-training datasets with LLMs to advance code intelligence, challenging the traditional reliance on human reference comments.