Search for: All records

Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated unprecedented capabilities in code generation. However, there remains a limited understanding of code generation errors that LLMs can produce. To bridge the gap, we conducted an in-depth analysis of code generation errors across six representative LLMs on the HumanEval dataset. Specifically, we first employed open coding and thematic analysis to distill a comprehensive taxonomy of code generation errors. We analyzed two dimensions of error characteristics -- semantic characteristics and syntactic characteristics. Our analysis revealed that LLMs often made non-trivial, multi-line code generation errors in various locations and with various root causes. We further analyzed the correlation between these errors and task complexity as well as test pass rate. Our findings highlighted several challenges in locating and fixing code generation errors made by LLMs. In the end, we discussed several future directions to address these challenges. 

Large Language Models (LLMs) have recently been widely used for code generation. Due to the complexity and opacity of LLMs, little is known about how these models generate code. We made the first attempt to bridge this knowledge gap by investigating whether LLMs attend to the same parts of a task description as human programmers during code generation. An analysis of six LLMs, including GPT-4, on two popular code generation benchmarks revealed a consistent misalignment between LLMs' and programmers' attention. We manually analyzed 211 incorrect code snippets and found five attention patterns that can be used to explain many code generation errors. Finally, a user study showed that model attention computed by a perturbation-based method is often favored by human programmers. Our findings highlight the need for human-aligned LLMs for better interpretability and programmer trust.