Steve Brandt

Patrick Diehl, Noujoud Nader, Steve Brandt et al.

This study evaluates the capabilities of ChatGPT versions 3.5 and 4 in generating code across a diverse range of programming languages. Our objective is to assess the effectiveness of these AI models for generating scientific programs. To this end, we asked ChatGPT to generate three distinct codes: a simple numerical integration, a conjugate gradient solver, and a parallel 1D stencil-based heat equation solver. The focus of our analysis was on the compilation, runtime performance, and accuracy of the codes. While both versions of ChatGPT successfully created codes that compiled and ran (with some help), some languages were easier for the AI to use than others (possibly because of the size of the training sets used). Parallel codes -- even the simple example we chose to study here -- also difficult for the AI to generate correctly.

Noujoud Nader, Patrick Diehl, Steve Brandt et al.

Large Language Models (LLMs), such as GPT-4 and DeepSeek, have been applied to a wide range of domains in software engineering. However, their potential in the context of High-Performance Computing (HPC) much remains to be explored. This paper evaluates how well DeepSeek, a recent LLM, performs in generating a set of HPC benchmark codes: a conjugate gradient solver, the parallel heat equation, parallel matrix multiplication, DGEMM, and the STREAM triad operation. We analyze DeepSeek's code generation capabilities for traditional HPC languages like Cpp, Fortran, Julia and Python. The evaluation includes testing for code correctness, performance, and scaling across different configurations and matrix sizes. We also provide a detailed comparison between DeepSeek and another widely used tool: GPT-4. Our results demonstrate that while DeepSeek generates functional code for HPC tasks, it lags behind GPT-4, in terms of scalability and execution efficiency of the generated code.